Eastern Massachusetts

National Wildlife Refuge

Complex

U.S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceU

What is the Plan?

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

is in the final stages of developing a

Comprehensive Conservation Plan

(CCP) and Environmental

Assessment (EA) for four of the

eight refuges in the Eastern

Massachusetts National Wildlife

Refuge Complex. This plan will

outline management direction and

strategies for Assabet River, Great

Meadows, Massasoit, and Oxbow

National Wildlife Refuges. The EA

presents three different alternatives

we are considering for management

and evaluates their consequences.

We present highlights of these

alternatives on pages 2-6 to provide

Planning Update Spring 2002

Fishing at Oxbow NWR.

Eastern Massachusetts National Wildlife Refuge Complex

you with a better idea of what you

will see in the CCP/EA.

When we began the planning process,

we intended to release a Draft CCP

and Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) for all the refuges in the

Complex. After assessing the scope

of the issues for each refuge, we

decided to release two documents

rather than one. A Draft CCP/EA

for Great Meadows, Assabet River,

Oxbow and Massasoit will be

released later this year. A CCP/EIS

for the Cape and Island refuges will

be released at a later date.

National Wildlife Refuge

System Mission

“To administer a national

network of lands and waters for

the conservation, management,

and where appropriate,

restoration of the fish, wildlife,

and plant resources and their

habitats within the United States

for the benefit of present and

future generations of

Americans.”

Frog at Great Meadows NWR.

Oxbow NWR

Assabet River NWR

Great Meadows NWR

Massasoit NWR

Mashpee NWR

Nomans Land Island NWR

Nantucket NWR

Monomoy NWR
2U

More about planning

How have we involved the public in the planning process?

We began planning in 1999 with an intensive public scoping effort. As part of

this effort, we held Open Houses in ten different communities. We sent out

over 8,000 Issues Workbooks to collect comments. Over 650 workbooks were

returned and additional comments were collected at meetings with local

planning boards, State and Federal agencies, conservation organizations,

sporting groups and interested community members. We used the

information and comments collected to identify issues and formulate draft

goals, objectives and different alternatives for management.

A number of you learned about the planning process through refuge

programs and requested to be on the mailing list. We appreciate your

interest in the project and look forward to hearing from you again.

State Agency Involvement

Personnel from the Massachusetts Department of Fisheries and Wildlife and

Department of Environmental Management have been involved in the

planning process from the beginning. State biologists provided input early in

the process and other state representatives from these agencies have

participated in alternative briefings. We plan to work with these agencies

even more in the future. In addition, we will continue to work with our

many conservation partners.

What’s next?

We are in the final steps of editing

our CCP/EA which will be

released for a 30 day public review

and comment period. You will

receive an Executive Summary in

the mail, which will outline three

different alternatives we are

considering, including our

Proposed Action. Each alternative

provides a detailed analysis of its

management directions. Full

documents will be distributed to

Federal, State, and local offices

and conservation organizations on

compact disc. Full documents will

also be available upon request by

anyone.

We encourage you to stay involved

in this process. We hope you will

take time to look over the

document when it arrives, and

provide us with your comments.

Volunteer leading a program. Volunteers

are a big help on our refuges. They assist

staff with biological fieldwork and

environmental education and

interpretive programs.

Highlights of the Draft Alternatives

The following pages show how our three alternatives will address some key

issues identified by the planning team and public. The draft CCP/EA will

address more issues than we have included here. Alternative A is the “No

Action” alternative, which represents our current management. Alternative

B is the “Service’s Proposed Action,” representing our recommended

actions and strategies. Please note that many actions and strategies in the

No Action alternative are also part of our Service Proposed Action, but may

not be listed again under the Proposed Action in this update. Alternative C

addresses only those issues we felt needed to be addressed in a third option.

Compatibility Determinations

Draft Compatibility Determinations will be included in the CCP/EA. They

ensure that refuge uses do not interfere with refuge purposes or the mission

of the National Wildlife Refuge System. We will write them for each use

allowed under the Service’s Proposed Action.
3U

Alternative A (Current Management, The “No Action” Alternative)

• Conduct limited number of surveys and obtain information from

partners

• Remove some existing roads and trails not required for refuge

maintenance or visitor use as well as portions of exterior fence

• Restore degraded wetlands where possible

• Evaluate and reuse ammunition bunkers which prove suitable for

bat habitat

• Monitor known stands of invasive plants and control when possible

• Maintain closure to all public access except for special organized tours

and guided events

• Support existing Friend’s Group which assists in outreach and

management activities

• Maintain outreach through the Complex website

• Continue to share staff with the Complex and Oxbow NWR

• Continue to evaluate whether lands near the refuge, available from willing sellers, should be included in the

Refuge System. If so, initiate the public notification and acquisition process.

Alternative B (The Service’s Proposed Action)

• Inventory habitats and species; evaluate population status of key species

• Inventory and manage invasive and overabundant species

• Assess management of grassland and forest habitats in Habitat Management Plan; restore those

habitats impacted as a result of military activity

• Establish new access points for public use as safety hazards are removed

• Provide deer, upland game birds, turkey, and small game mammal hunting opportunities

• Provide fishing opportunities at Puffer Pond

• Provide foot trails on old roads, a wildlife viewing platform and photography blind

• Develop new environmental education and interpretive programs (including kiosks and self-guided trails)

• Increase outreach effort to local communities

• Provide additional biological and public use staff

• Conduct assessment of historical and cultural resources

• Work with partners toward funding and construction of visitor contact

station

Alternative C

• Conduct limited habitat and wildlife management programs

• Open refuge only after all safety hazards are removed

• Provide limited hunting opportunities

• Provide fishing opportunities on westerly shore of Puffer Pond only

• Conduct limited outreach to local communities

• Open foot trails opened only on Patrol and Old Marlboro Roads

Comprehensive Conservation Plans

Highlights of the Draft Alternatives for Assabet RiverNWR

Puffer Pond. The Service’s Proposed

Action would include opportunities for

fishing.

Assabet River NWR. Under the Proposed

Action, the refuge would be opened after

safety hazards,like this wire, are

removed.
4U

Alternative A (Current Management, The “No Action” Alternative)

• Inventory breeding birds, marsh birds, woodcock, amphibians,

waterfowl, and shorebirds annually

• Band waterfowl and monitor wood duck boxes through partners

• Assist with reintroduction and survey efforts for anadromous fish in

Concord and Sudbury Rivers

• Maintain existing acres of fields by mowing

• Manage Concord impoundments for waterfowl and shorebirds

• Control invasive species through mechanical, chemical and biological

controls

• Maintain hunting closure

• Provide fishing opportunities provided along the river

• Continue to offer wildlife observation and photography and

environmental education opportunities

• Maintain refuge law enforcement presence

• Support existing Friend’s Group which assists in outreach and management activities

• Maintain outreach through the Complex website

• Maintain refuge headquarters and maintenance shop in Sudbury

• Continue to evaluate whether lands near the refuge, available from willing sellers, should be included in the

Refuge System. If so, initiate the public notification and acquisition process.

Alternative B (The Service’s Proposed Action)

• Inventory habitats, and species; evaluate population status of key species

• Inventory and manage invasive and overabundant species

• Eliminate cooperative farming

• Maintain and develop water control structures

• Open limited portions of the refuge to archery deer hunting and waterfowl hunting

• Provide additional fishing opportunities provided along the river

• Provide new photo blinds, observation platforms, habitat demonstration areas and signage for wildlife

observation and photography opportunities

• Develop new environmental education and interpretive programs (including kiosks and demonstration sites)

• Increase outreach effort in Boston metropolitan area (Urban Education Program)

• Eliminate non-wildlife dependent uses (dog walking, jogging)

• Provide additional staff

• Construct a new visitor center in the Concord/Lincoln area, renovate existing exhibits and space in

headquarters

• Designate the Sudbury Unit of Great Meadows NWR as Sudbury River NWR

Comprehensive Conservation Plans

Highlights of the Draft Alternatives for Great Meadows NWR

Alternative C

• Conduct limited habitat and wildlife management programs

• Conduct limited invasive species control

• Provide expanded hunting opportunities beyond Alternative B

Urban Education. These students from

Boston and Worester schools are learning

about turtles. The refuge’s Urban

Education Program gives inner-city kids

an opportunity to learn about wildlife.

Purple Loosestrife. The refuge continues to combat purple loosestrife with biological

control techniques. The Service’s Proposed Action expands the invasive species

control program for a more comprehensive and aggressive approach.
Alternative A (Current Management, The “No Action” Alternative)

• Maintain nesting habitat periodically for Northern red-bellied cooter (previously called the Plymouth redbelly

turtle) and cooperatively manage with State

• Support inventory effort by partners; Refuge conducts some inventories

• Maintain year-round closure; no hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography, environmental education

or interpretation opportunities exist

• Maintain turtle interpretive exhibit in Complex Headquarters in Sudbury

• Continue outreach opportunities through the Complex website

• Continue to evaluate whether lands near the refuge, available from willing sellers, should be included in the

Refuge System. If so, initiate the public notification and acquisition process.

• Refuge managed from Complex headquarters, no on-site staff

Alternative B (The Service’s Proposed Action)

• Conduct additional research, monitoring, and management for the

Northern red-bellied cooter, develop long-term cooter plan

• Inventory habitats, and species; evaluate population status of key

species

• Inventory and manage invasive and overabundant species

• Provide opportunities for deer, upland game bird, and small game

hunting seasonally according to State regulations

• Create trail along existing road for wildlife observation and

photography opportunities

• Develop new environmental education and interpretive programs

(including programs centered around the Northern red-bellied cooter,

signs and brochures)

• Increase outreach effort to local communities

• Construct a headquarters and visitor contact station in Plymouth area

• Remove existing cabin on Crooked Pond

• Provide new staffing on site

Alternative C

• Expand biological programs to include baseline inventories and

surveys

• Continue cooter research and develop long term cooter plan

• Expand environmental education opportunities similar to Alternative

B, plus additional programs in schools

• Expand outreach effort opportunities similar to Alternative B, plus

develop permanent display at Route 3 rest area and conduct local

cooter festival

• Provide additional staff

Comprehensive Conservation Plans

Highlights of the Draft Alternatives for Massasoit NWR

5U

Northern red-bellied cooter. Massasoit

NWR was created to protect the Federally

endangered Northern red-bellied cooter.

Some of you may be familiar with its

previous name, Plymouth redbelly turtle.

Headstart Program Massasoit NWR

participates in the Northern red-bellied

cooter headstart program. The refuge

raises hatchlings until they are big

enough to survive on their own and then

releases them into their habitat. The

headstart program would continue under

all the alternatives.
Alternative A (Current Management, The “No Action” Alternative)

• Conduct limited biological surveys and obtain information from

partners

• Support blandings turtle monitoring program by partners, continue

habitat manipulation

• Maintain existing old field and wetland habitat acres

• Restore degraded wetland acres where possible

• Selectively remove existing roads and trails not required for refuge

maintenance or visitor use

• Monitor known stands of invasive species and control when possible

• Maintain deer hunting closure

• Allow upland game bird, turkey and woodcock hunting in some areas

• Allow fishing on Nashua River by boat only; no wetland pools

open for fishing

• Maintain canoe launch and foot trails

• Continue on and off-refuge environmental education and interpretive

programs provided for Worcester schools

• Maintain outreach through the Complex website

• Support existing Friend’s Group which assists in outreach and

management activities

• Continue to evaluate whether lands near the refuge, available from

willing sellers, should be included in the Refuge System. If so, initiate

the public notification and acquisition process.

• Continue to share staff with the Complex and Assabet River NWR

Alternative B (The Service’s Proposed Action)

• Inventory habitats and species; evaluate population status of key species

• Inventory and manage invasive and overabundant species

• Assess management of grassland, wetland and forest habitats in Habitat Management Plan

• Open portions of the refuge to deer, upland game bird, turkey, woodcock, and small mammal

hunting

• Provide fishing opportunities along the shoreline of the river

• Provide additional canoe launch and landing, wildlife viewing platform, and photography blind

• Develop new environmental education and interpretive programs (including kiosks and self-guided trail),

expand Urban Education Program

• Increase outreach effort to local communities

• Work with partners toward funding construction of a visitor contact station at Jackson Gate

• Provide additional staff

Alternative C

• Provide limited habitat and wildlife management programs

• Provide limited access for pubic use to a few select areas

• Inventory and document all invasive and exotic species; monitor rate of spread

• Provide hunting opportunities similar to Alternative B, but in limited areas

• Continue limited outreach

Comprehensive Conservation Plans

Highlights of the Draft Alternatives for Oxbow NWR

6U

Habitat Management. The refuge will be

writing a Habitat Management Plan to

address management objectives and

strategies for wetland, grassland and

forest management specifics.
Lindsay Krey, Assistant Planner

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

. 300 Westgate Center Dr

Hadley, Massachusetts 01035