Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

and Environmental Impact Statement 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Southeast Region 

August 2007

FINAL COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN/ 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

For 

VIEQUES NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 

VIEQUES, PUERTO RICO 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Southeast Region 

Atlanta, Georgia 

August 2007 



Table of Contents i

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

SECTION A. FINAL COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL 

IMPACT STATEMENT 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 1

I. INTRODUCTION, PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ........................................................... 1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1

Purpose of and Need For Action .................................................................................................. 1

Project Area .................................................................................................................................. 2

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission ......................................................................................... 6

Service Mission Statement .................................................................................................. 6

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission and Goals .................................................................... 6

Refuge System Mission Statement ..................................................................................... 6

Refuge System Goals ......................................................................................................... 6

Service Policies, Legal Mandates, and National and Regional Conservation Plans .............................. 6

Refuge Purposes and Land Acquisition Authority ........................................................................ 8

Refuge Operational Plans (Step-Down Plans) .................................................................... 9

Refuge Vision Statement .................................................................................................... 9

Refuge Goals .............................................................................................................................. 10

The Comprehensive Conservation Planning Process ................................................................ 11

Issues, Concerns, and Opportunities ......................................................................................... 13

Issues Outside The Scope Of This CCP/EIS .................................................................... 14

Plan Amendment and Revision .................................................................................................. 14

Legal and Policy Guidance ......................................................................................................... 15

II. DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT .................................................................. 17

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 17

Physical Environment ................................................................................................................. 17

Climate .............................................................................................................................. 17

Topography ....................................................................................................................... 17

Geology ............................................................................................................................. 21

Soils .................................................................................................................................. 21

Hydrology .......................................................................................................................... 26

Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 29

Contaminants/Hazardous Material .................................................................................... 29

Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................... 32

Roads, Utilities, and Infrastructure .................................................................................... 32

Biological Resources .................................................................................................................. 34

Fauna ................................................................................................................................ 34

Flora .................................................................................................................................. 37

Vegetation Communities ................................................................................................... 38

Threatened and Endangered Species (Federally Listed) .................................................. 44

Socioeconomic Characteristics .................................................................................................. 53

Cultural History .................................................................................................................. 53

Employment ...................................................................................................................... 56

Population ......................................................................................................................... 58

Political Setting .................................................................................................................. 59

Public Use ......................................................................................................................... 59
Archaeological Resources ................................................................................................ 60

Wilderness ........................................................................................................................ 63

III. ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................................................ 65

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 65

Formulating Alternatives ............................................................................................................. 65

General Description Of The Alternatives .................................................................................... 65

Alternative A (Current Management Or No-Action) ........................................................... 66

Alternative B (Resource Emphasis) .................................................................................. 66

Alternative C (Habitat and Public Use Emphasis) - Proposed Alternative ........................ 66

Proposed Alternative ......................................................................................................... 66

Compatibility Determinations ...................................................................................................... 66

Management Highlights Common To All Alternatives ................................................................ 67

Relationship Of Issues To Goals, Objectives, and Strategies .................................................... 69

Alternative A (No-Action – Current Management) ...................................................................... 69

Management Focus .......................................................................................................... 69

Alternative B (Resource Emphasis) ............................................................................................ 81

Management Focus .......................................................................................................... 81

Alternative C (Habitat and Public Use Emphasis) .................................................................... 97

(Proposed Alternative) ................................................................................................................ 97

Management Focus .......................................................................................................... 97

Actions Or Proposals Considered But Not Fully Developed Or Included In The Alternatives .. 150

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...................................................................................... 153

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 153

Effects Common To All Alternatives ......................................................................................... 154

Physical Environment ...................................................................................................... 154

Biological Resources ....................................................................................................... 160

SocioEconomic Factors .................................................................................................. 160

Comparison Of Effects Of The Alternatives .............................................................................. 161

Physical Environment ...................................................................................................... 162

Aesthetics ........................................................................................................................ 164

Biological Resources ....................................................................................................... 164

SocioEconomic Factors .................................................................................................. 166

Mitigation Measures To Be Incorporated In All Alternatives ........................................... 167

Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................................. 168

Short-Term Use Versus Long-Term Productivity ...................................................................... 168

Unavoidable Adverse Impacts .................................................................................................. 169

Irreversible And Irretrievable Commitments Of Resources ...................................................... 170

V. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION .................................................................................... 175

SECTION B. APPENDICES 

APPENDIX I. GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................ 179

APPENDIX II. REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED............................................................... 187

APPENDIX III. RELEVANT LEGAL MANDATES ............................................................................. 191
Table of Contents iii

National Wildlife Refuge System Authorities ............................................................................ 191

Key Legislation/Policies For Plan Implementation .................................................................... 191

Legislation Specific To Vieques NWR ...................................................................................... 198

APPENDIX IV. SERVICE COMMENTS ON VIEQUES CULEBRA MASTER PLAN FOR 

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................... 237

APPENDIX V. REFUGE RESOURCE INFORMATION .................................................................... 241

Soils .......................................................................................................................................... 241

Fauna ....................................................................................................................................... 243

APPENDIX VI. WILDERNESS REVIEW .......................................................................................... 255

APPENDIX VII. DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS ............................................................................... 264

APPENDIX VIII. PUBLIC SCOPING ................................................................................................. 268

Summary Of Public Scoping Comments and Issues ................................................................ 268

Summary of Public Review Comments and Service Response ............................................... 272

APPENDIX IX INTRA-SERVICE SECTION 7 CONSULTATION...................................................... 292

APPENDIX X. COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATIONS ...................................................................... 300

APPENDIX XI. MANAGEMENT METHODS AND PRIORITIES ...................................................... 312

Partners In Flight Conservation Recommendations ................................................................. 312

Archaeological and Historic Resource Protection .................................................................... 313

Ecosystem Management ..........................................................................................................313

APPENDIX XII. DRAFT COMMUNITY INTEREST SURVEY CONDUCTED BY UNIVERSITY OF 

PUERTO RICO SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM ........................................................... 322
LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1. Vieques location map .......................................................................................................... 4

Figure 2. Vieques National Wildlife Refuge boundaries ......................................................................5

Figure 3. Vieques average monthly rainfall ....................................................................................... 18

Figure 4. Vieques topographic map (west) ....................................................................................... 19

Figure 5. Vieques topographic map (east) ........................................................................................ 20

Figure 6. Vieques geological features (west) .................................................................................... 22

Figure 7. Vieques geological features (east) .................................................................................... 23

Figure 8. Vieques soils (west) ........................................................................................................... 24

Figure 9. Vieques soils (east) ........................................................................................................... 25

Figure 10. Vieques watersheds (west) ................................................................................................ 27

Figure 11. Vieques watersheds (east) ................................................................................................ 28

Figure 12. Opened/closed areas ......................................................................................................... 31

Figure 13. Threatened and endangered species (west) ..................................................................... 45

Figure 14. Threatened and endangered species (east) ...................................................................... 46

Figure 15. Cultural resources (west) ................................................................................................... 54

Figure 16. Cultural resources (east) ................................................................................................... 55

Figure 17. Organization of personnel under Alternative A .................................................................. 80

Figure 18. Organization of personnel under Alternative B .................................................................. 96

Figure 19. Proposed alternative public uses (west) .......................................................................... 107

Figure 20. Proposed alternative public uses (east) ...........................................................................108

Figure 21. Proposed alternative roads and trails .............................................................................. 109

Figure 22. Organization of personnel under Alternative C ................................................................ 118

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1. Issues identified during scoping .......................................................................................... 13

Table 2. Vieques rare plant species .................................................................................................. 39

Table 3. Commonwealth critical species ........................................................................................... 50

Table 4. Average annual employment growth, by municipality (1990-2002) .................................... 57

Table 5. Vieques selected population characteristics (from: U.S. Census 2000) ............................. 58

Table 6. Archaeological site predictive model ................................................................................... 62

Table 7. Comparison of alternatives ............................................................................................... 120

Table 8. Environmental consequences evaluation factors .............................................................. 153

Table 9. Criteria for rating severity of impacts ................................................................................ 156

Table 10. Potential economic effects of alternatives .........................................................................167

Table 11. Comparison of funding needs by alternative ..................................................................... 170

Table 12. Comparison of environmental consequences ................................................................... 172

Table 13. Vieques Refuge core planning team ................................................................................. 175

Table 14. Caribbean Islands National Wildlife Refuge biological review team ................................. 177
SECTION A. FINAL COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN 

AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

Executive Summary 

The Fish and Wildlife Service prepared this Comprehensive Conservation Plan/Environmental Impact 

Statement (CCP/EIS) to guide the management of the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge in the 

municipality of Vieques, Puerto Rico. This document outlines alternatives and identifies a proposed 

alternative for management of the refuge for the next 15 years, as mandated by the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. 

The Vieques National Wildlife Refuge was created from former Navy managed lands by 

congressional actions in 2001 and 2003. The refuge consists of approximately 17,771 acres--3,100 

acres on western Vieques and 14,671 acres on eastern Vieques. 

The refuge lands were historically used for agricultural purposes and more recently for military 

training activities. As a result, the wildlife habitats and communities are significantly altered and nonnative invasive species are common along with remnants of native habitats. As a result of the military 

training, portions of the refuge contain unexploded ordnance and other contaminants. These areas 

have been classified as a “superfund site” under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Cleanup of these portions of the refuge is being 

conducted by the Navy in accordance with CERCLA. In addition, a Federal Facilities Agreement 

between the Navy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Fish and Wildlife Service, and the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico will help to guide the cleanup process. 

Although the short-term use and management of areas contaminated with unexploded ordnance 

would be restricted, the alternatives in this CCP/EIS were developed with the assumption that these 

lands would be cleaned of any contaminants that would pose a threat to either the wildlife or visitors 

to the refuge. Until the lands are cleaned and certified as suitable for a proposed use, the Service 

would not be able to implement portions of this plan. After cleanup and certification, implementation 

of management proposals would progress in accordance with agency priorities. 

Before the Service began the development of the CCP/EIS, it hosted a series of public scoping 

meetings to solicit public opinion and identify issues the plan should address. To address the existing 

habitat conditions, the ongoing cleanup activities, the issues identified by the public and the mission 

and purpose of the refuge, the planning team established a series of goals for the plan. The goals 

are: 1) Conserve, enhance, and restore native plant communities and wetland habitats and their 

associated fish, wildlife, and plants, representative of the native biological diversity that would have 

been found on Vieques Refuge lands prior to major agricultural and military use of the lands; 2) 

Monitor, protect, and recover special status animals, plants, and species of management interest; 3) 

Provide opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation and education to enhance public appreciation, 

understanding, and enjoyment of refuge wildlife, habitats, and cultural history; 4) Through cooperative 

efforts with partners, ensure the refuge is cleaned of all classes of contaminants that could pose a 

threat to the health and safety of the wildlife, residents, staff, and visitors; 5) Provide the resources 

needed to implement the selected management alternative and ensure the other goals and objectives 

identified in the plan can be achieved; and 6) Develop effective and open communication with the 

community to raise public awareness of refuge programs, management decisions, the mission of the 

Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Wildlife Refuge System by working closely with the 

Vieques citizens and interested groups and organizations. Based on these goals and information 
obtained during the scoping process, the planning team developed three alternatives to help address 

the issues identified and achieve the vision for the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge. 

ALTERNATIVE A (CURRENT MANAGEMENT OR NO ACTION) 

The current management alternative provides for a continuation of the existing level of management. 

Staffing would remain at the current levels and ongoing programs and activities would continue with 

only minor changes and no new programs. 

 

ALTERNATIVE B (RESOURCE EMPHASIS) 

This alternative focuses on wildlife and habitat management but maintains the existing visitor 

programs and public uses. Habitat management and monitoring would be expanded and agreements 

with research, governmental, and non-governmental organizations would be developed to provide 

information needed for the management of forests, grasslands, coastal wetlands, beaches, and listed 

species and their habitats. In partnership with others, programs would be developed for management 

of nesting sea turtle populations on Vieques beaches. 

ALTERNATIVE C (HABITAT MANAGEMENT AND PUBLIC USE EMPHASIS) 

(PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE) 

This alternative directs the refuge toward a realistic and achievable level of both habitat management and 

public use and provides a management program that addresses the needs of the resources and, where 

appropriate and compatible with the refuge purposes, the needs of the community. This alternative 

provides for increases in management efforts to restore the refuge habitats without diminishing the wildlife 

values associated with the current conditions. There is also a focus on management activities to benefit 

threatened and endangered species. This includes the possible reintroduction of species extirpated from 

Vieques, such as the Yellow-shouldered Blackbird, and expansion of populations of species already 

found on the refuge, such as Stahlia monosperma and Goetzia elegans. Priority public uses, as identified 

in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, would be expanded and other uses that 

are determined to be compatible with the refuge mission may be permitted. Historic and archaeological 

resources would be stabilized and, where possible, interpretation of their significance and role in the 

evolution of Vieques would be provided. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 1

I. Introduction, Purpose of and Need for 

Action 

INTRODUCTION 

The proposed action considered in this document is the development and implementation of a 

comprehensive conservation plan that achieves the purpose, vision, and goals for the Vieques 

National Wildlife Refuge; contributes to the National Wildlife Refuge System mission; addresses the 

significant issues identified during the development of the plan; complies with relevant legislative and 

policy mandates, and is consistent with principles of sound fish and wildlife management. 

This Comprehensive Conservation Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (CCP/EIS) for the Vieques 

National Wildlife Refuge combines two documents required by federal laws: a comprehensive 

conservation plan required by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public 

Law 105-57) and an environmental impact statement required by the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969. 

The comprehensive conservation plan would be used as a tool by the refuge staff and partners to 

provide direction for refuge management and restoration activities. It would guide management 

decisions over the next 15 years and identify strategies for achieving refuge goals and objectives. 

The environmental impact statement describes a range of alternative management actions and 

programs that are being considered for inclusion in the final comprehensive conservation plan. Upon 

completion of the review process, public involvement, and analysis of all available information, the 

comprehensive conservation plan would be finalized. The CCP/EIS is divided into 5 chapters: I) 

Introduction, Purpose of and Need for Action; II) Affected Environment; III) Alternatives, Objectives, 

and Strategies; IV) Environmental Consequences; and V) Consultation and Coordination. 

Appendices provide supporting information for the CCP/EIS and provide the reader with background 

information to aid understanding of the document’s contents. 

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION 

The Vieques National Wildlife Refuge is one of more than 540 refuges in the National Wildlife Refuge 

System managed by the Fish and Wildlife Service. Overall, there is a need to manage the refuge in 

accordance with the Refuge System mission, goals, and policies as described in the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Appendix III). A comprehensive conservation plan, 

required by the Refuge System Improvement Act, is needed to address significant problems that may 

adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish, wildlife, and plants and the actions necessary to 

correct or mitigate such problems. Specifically, the focus of the plan for the Vieques Refuge seeks to: 

ensure the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of refuge habitats; restore 

degraded forest, coastal and wetland habitats; evaluate and manage visitor use; and ensure that the 

clean-up of the refuge is adequate to protect the environment, the fish and wildlife resources, and the 

visitors to the refuge. In addition, the Refuge System Improvement Act requires the Service to 

consider providing opportunities for people to experience wildlife-dependent recreation. 
2 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

The purpose of this comprehensive conservation plan is to develop a vision for the refuge and 

provide management guidance through science, maintenance, restoration ecology, and compatible 

public use of refuge resources during the next 15 years. Specifically, the plan would: 

• set a long-term vision for the refuge; 

• establish management goals, objectives, and strategies; 

• define compatible recreational uses of the refuge; 

• determine appropriate levels of use; 

• outline habitat and public use projects that support the goals and objectives; 

• identify areas of the refuge suitable for public use activities; 

• describe highest priorities for habitat restoration and management; and 

• adopt step-down plans for specific management activities. 

The purpose of the environmental impact statement is to describe alternative plans for managing the 

refuge. The environmental impact statement shows a range of alternative management activities and 

public uses considered during the planning process and evaluates the possible environmental effects 

of the various alternatives on the natural, social, cultural, and economic environment. 

The comprehensive conservation plan would provide a framework for future refuge management. 

The environmental analysis of the alternatives for this plan is at the conceptual planning level and 

does not provide detailed site plans and does not have exact locations for facilities. 

PROJECT AREA 

Vieques is an island municipality of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and is approximately 

seven miles east of the main island (Figure 1). It has an area of about 51 square miles or 

33,120 acres (13,403 ha). The refuge consists of two major parcels of land on the eastern 

and western portions of the island. The total area of the refuge is 17,769 acres (7,191 ha) or 

approximately 54 percent of the island (Figure 2). The central portion of the island contains 

two major population centers, Isabel Segunda on the north and Esperanza on the south. 

Additional details about the island are provided in Chapter II. 

Western Refuge Unit

Vieques Refuge, on the island of Vieques to the east of the main island of Puerto Rico, was 

established in May 2001 through the legislated transfer of the Navy lands on the western 

portion of Vieques. At that time, portions of the Naval Activities Support Detachment property 

were transferred to the municipality of Vieques, the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust and the 

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. These lands consisted of approximately 

8,200 acres (3,280 hectares) on the western end of Vieques Island, Puerto Rico. Although 

the property is mainly undeveloped, it was used by the Navy from 1943 until 2001 for a variety 

of purposes including: ammunition storage, operation of communications facilities, handling 

and disposal of munitions and other activities; and support services for Naval Station 

Roosevelt Roads on the main island of Puerto Rico and the Atlantic Fleet Weapons Training 

Facility on the eastern end of Vieques. 

On May 1, 2001, approximately 3,100 acres (1,220 hectares) comprising the Conservation Zones 

designated in Section IV of the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding between the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Secretary of the Navy were transferred to Department of 

the Interior. A parcel of 800 acres (320 hectares), composed of the additional Conservation 

Zones identified in the draft environmental assessment for the western Vieques land transfer, was 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 3

conveyed to the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust. The remaining Navy lands on western Vieques, 

approximately 4,200 acres (1,740 hectares), were transferred to the municipality of Vieques. 

The final legislation directed the Navy to undertake activities needed to identify and clean-up 

contaminated areas as required by CERCLA to facilitate utilization of the property for the 

benefit of the municipality of Vieques. It also directed the Department of the Interior to 

administer the Conservation Zones transferred to it as a wildlife refuge under the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 United States Code [USC] 688 dd). 

As mandated by Public Law 106-398 (Appendix III), a cooperative agreement for the 

management of the Conservation Areas was developed and signed by the Commonwealth 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, 

and the Fish and Wildlife Service on April 26, 2001. This cooperative agreement established 

that, subject to funding availability, the agencies responsible for management of the 

conservation lands would develop a management plan for the conservation of the resources 

on the areas to be transferred, and would also include the extensive area of sea grasses 

northwest of the Mosquito Pier, as identified in the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding. On 

November 20, 2002, a Management Plan for the Western Vieques Conservation Areas was 

signed by the Commonwealth Secretary of the Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources, the Executive Director of the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, and the Regional 

Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Concurrent with congressional consideration of the transfer legislation, the Puerto Rico 

Planning Board, in conjunction with other Commonwealth agencies and the municipality of 

Vieques, developed a proposed land use plan to be implemented upon conveyance of the 

property to the municipality. The municipality of Vieques concurred with the proposed 

Vieques Land Use Plan, prepared by the Puerto Rico Planning Board, and agreed to manage 

and control the land to be conveyed to it consistent with the terms of the land use plan. 

Eastern Refuge Unit

On December 28, 2001, Public Law 107-107 amended the previous Spence Act (Public Law 

106-398) to provide the Navy with the authority to close the Vieques Naval Training Range 

and discontinue training at the range. This law also provided for the transfer of the Live 

Impact Area, Conservation Zones, and all other Department of Defense real properties on the 

eastern side of the island to the Department of the Interior. The area transferred to the Fish 

and Wildlife Service jurisdiction was approximately 14,669 acres (7,191 ha). This included the 

Live Impact Area identified in the legislation as a separate parcel to be managed as a 

wilderness, with no public access permitted. In order to carry out the provisions of this law 

requiring the transfer, the Departments of Navy and Interior developed Memoranda of 

Agreement for East and West Vieques lands to define the conditions of the transfer and the 

responsibilities of the two agencies with regard to land management and environmental 

remediation. Among the responsibilities defined is the Navy acceptance of responsibility to 

fund and implement any response actions required by law to address environmental 

contamination resulting from the prior Navy activities. Copies of the Memoranda of 

Agreement between the Navy and Department of the Interior for both the eastern and western 

refuge lands are provided in Appendix III. 
4 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 1. Vieques location map 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 5 Atlantic Ocean Vieques National Wildlife Refuge Municipality of Vieques PR Conservation Trust Vieques NWR Refuge Limits Caribbean Sea 024 1 Miles 024 1 Kilometers



Figure 2. Vieques National Wildlife Refuge boundaries
6 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE MISSION 

SERVICE MISSION STATEMENT 

The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is: 

“Working with others, to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for 

the continuing benefit of the American people." The Fish and Wildlife Service is the only agency of 

the U.S. Government with that primary mission. 

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM MISSION AND GOALS 

REFUGE SYSTEM MISSION STATEMENT 

The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System is: 

“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.” 

REFUGE SYSTEM GOALS 

The following goals guide the administration, management, and growth of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System: 

y To fulfill our statutory duty to achieve refuge purpose(s) and further the System mission. 

y To conserve, restore, where appropriate, and enhance all species of fish, wildlife, and plants 

that are endangered or threatened with becoming endangered. 

y To perpetuate migratory bird, interjurisdictional fish, and marine mammal populations. 

y To conserve a diversity of fish, wildlife, and plants. We sustain all native species of animals 

and plants that inhabit units of the System through our efforts to maintain the biological 

diversity, biological integrity, and environmental health of each unit. 

y To conserve and restore, where appropriate, representative ecosystems of the United States, 

including the ecological processes characteristic of those ecosystems. 

y To foster understanding and instill appreciation of fish, wildlife, and plants, and their 

conservation, by providing the public with safe, quality, and compatible wildlife-dependent 

public use. Such use includes hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and 

environmental education and interpretation. 

SERVICE POLICIES, LEGAL MANDATES, AND NATIONAL AND REGIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS 

Throughout the development of this CCP/EIS, the planning team complied with and considered 

guidance found in numerous documents. All refuges are guided by the mission and goals of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System, the designated purpose of the refuge unit as described in 

establishing legislation or executive orders, Service laws and policy, and international treaties. Key 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 7

concepts and guidance of the Refuge System are covered in the National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966, the Refuge Recreation Act of 1962, Title 50 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, and the National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1997. The Refuge System Improvement Act amends the Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966 by including a unifying mission for the Refuge System, a new process for 

determining compatible uses on refuges, and a requirement that each refuge will be managed under 

a comprehensive conservation plan. The Refuge System Improvement Act also states that wildlife 

conservation is the priority of Refuge System lands and that the Secretary of the Interior shall ensure 

that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of refuge lands are maintained. Each 

refuge must be managed to fulfill the Refuge System mission and the specific purposes for which it 

was established. The Act requires the Service to monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and 

plants on each refuge. Additionally, the Act identifies six priority wildlife-dependent recreational uses. 

These uses are hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation. As priority public uses of the Refuge System, these uses will receive 

enhanced consideration over other uses in planning and management. 

Lands within the Refuge System are different from other multiple-use public lands in that they are not 

opened to public uses unless the uses are first determined to be compatible with the purposes of the 

refuge. A compatible use is a use that, in the sound professional judgment of the refuge manager, 

will not materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the mission of the Refuge System or 

the purposes of the refuge. Sound professional judgment is further defined as a decision that is 

consistent with principles of fish and wildlife management and administration, available science and 

resources, and adherence with law. The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act 

establishes the procedures to conduct compatibility determinations for any proposed use, which 

include a public review and comment period. 

The Act requires that a comprehensive conservation plan be in place for each refuge by the year 

2012. It further requires that members of the public have an opportunity to be involved in plan 

development and revision. 

The Department of the Navy transferred a total of 17,769 acres on eastern and western Vieques, 

Puerto Rico, to the administrative jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior as required by the 

Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398), as 

amended by Section 1049 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 

107-107). In accordance with the law, the Department of the Interior is required to develop the land 

for use as a wildlife refuge, with the former live impact area to be managed as a wilderness area and 

closed to the public. In accordance with the terms of the Memoranda of Agreement between the 

Departments of Interior and Navy, and the Federal Facilities Agreement between the Environmental 

Protection Agency, Departments of Interior and Navy and the Commonwealth, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service will participate with the Navy and the other agencies in future decisions and actions regarding 

the long-term environmental clean-up at Vieques. While the Department of the Interior is directed to 

protect and conserve the natural resources through designation of the lands as a national wildlife 

refuge, the Department of the Navy retains the responsibility for conducting the environmental cleanup of this property. 

A Management Plan for the Western Vieques Conservation Areas (November 2002) was prepared in 

accordance with the land transfer legislation. That document provides background and 

recommendations for management of the refuge, Puerto Rico Conservation Trust lands, and the 

northwest sea grass beds. During the development of this CCP/EIS, the recommendations and 

objectives described in that document were considered and incorporated as appropriate. The 

Management Plan for the Western Vieques Conservation Areas is subject to review and revision 
8 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

every five years. During these reviews, the Commonwealth DNER, the Conservation Trust and the 

Fish and Wildlife Service should ensure the Western Vieques Conservation Area Management Plan 

and the proposals contained in the Service’s CCP are compatible with each other and that the 

management goals are consistent. A close working relationship between these three agencies with 

resource management responsibilities for adjacent areas is of paramount importance to ensure the 

overall management goals and objectives for these areas are met. 

The Fish and Wildlife Service’s Caribbean Ecosystem Team prepared the Caribbean Ecosystem Plan 

in October 2000. At that time, the Vieques Refuge had not yet been established and the ecosystem 

plan did not address specific issues to be considered for Vieques. However, several of the general 

issues identified in that plan, such as improving law enforcement capability, protection of coastal 

resources, sensitive species recovery, and improving communications, have been considered and 

incorporated into this document. 

In December 2004, the commonwealth approved the Vieques and Culebra Master Plan for 

Sustainable Development. Some of the recommendations made in that plan relate to portions of 

the Vieques Refuge and are addressed herein. While some of the recommendations are in 

conflict with the mission and policies of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Wildlife 

Refuge System and cannot be addressed in this plan, the Vieques CCP/EIS Planning Team has 

reviewed the document and has included some strategies to help address the need to provide a 

quality eco- tourism destination. The areas of conflict between the Master Plan and Refuge 

System policies were addressed in the Service’s comments to the Master Plan and are attached 

to this document as Appendix IV. 

REFUGE PURPOSES AND LAND ACQUISITION AUTHORITY 

National Wildlife Refuge System lands are acquired under a variety of legislative acts and 

administrative orders. According to the Refuge System Improvement Act, the terms “purposes of the 

refuge” and “purposes of each refuge” mean the purposes specified in or derived from the law, 

proclamation, executive order, agreement, public land order, donation document, or administrative 

memorandum establishing, authorizing, or expanding a refuge, refuge unit, or refuge subunit. The 

Service defines the purposes of national wildlife refuges when a refuge is established or when new 

land is added to an existing refuge. The Service documents the mechanisms used to acquire lands 

or to receive transferred lands. In the case of Vieques National Wildlife Refuge, the purposes were 

defined in the legislation that required the transfer of the lands from the Navy to the administrative 

jurisdiction of the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

The purposes shown here are based upon land acquisition documents and authorities. The unit 

purposes may also include purposes included as deed restrictions, management agreements with 

primary land managers, and congressional-established wilderness designations, which were not part 

of the acquisition documents and authorities. 

The legislation that established both the eastern (Public Law 107-107) and western (Public Law 106-

398) portions of the refuge stated that the Secretary of the Interior shall administer the lands as 

wildlife refuges under the National Wildlife Refuge Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et 

seq.). With respect to the “live impact area” on eastern Vieques, Public Law 107-107 further stated 

that the Secretary of the Interior shall administer that area as a wilderness area under the Wilderness 

Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), and deny public access to the area. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 9

REFUGE OPERATIONAL PLANS (STEP-DOWN PLANS) 

Refuge operational plans (step-down) address specific aspects of a refuge management program 

and provide detailed guidance for the refuge management team to administer the activity. The 

following is a list of plans that have been or will be prepared for the Vieques Refuge. Anticipated 

completion dates are provided for the plans that are not currently available: 

• Occupational Safety and Health Plan - In Draft 

• Fire Management Plan - In Draft - 2007-2008 

• Public Use Management Plan - 2009 

- hunting 

- fishing 

- visitor services and outreach 

- law enforcement 

- interpretation and environmental education 

- other recreational activities 

• Wilderness and Special Areas Management Plan (to be completed with the Public Use 

Management Plan) - 2009 

• Habitat Management Plan - 2009 

- wetland, water, riparian 

- forest management 

- integrated pest/weed management 

- grassland management 

• Fish and Wildlife Population Management Plan (to be completed with the Habitat Management 

Plan) - 2009 

- inventory and monitoring 

- invasive/exotic plant control 

- feral animal control 

Additional project-specific plans, with appropriate National Environmental Policy Act compliance, may 

be prepared for activities or programs that are not included in these step-down plans. 

REFUGE VISION STATEMENT 

The Vieques National Wildlife Refuge is on a scenic tropical island with a unique collection of fish, 

wildlife, plants, and habitats, as well as other valuable natural and cultural resources. The following 

vision statement for the refuge contemplates active management, protection of the resources, and 

compatible uses that will benefit the community and provide enjoyment for all visitors. 

“The Vieques National Wildlife Refuge is managed to: 1) restore, protect, and conserve fish 

and wildlife resources and habitats, with special emphasis on endangered species, wetlands 

and forest communities; 2) ensure that lands are clean, healthy, and safe for the wildlife and 

residents and visitors; and 3) provide opportunities for compatible wildlife-dependent 

recreational uses. The Service works in partnership with municipal, commonwealth, and 

federal agencies, the local community, educational institutions, and interest groups to provide 

a unique refuge environment for the enjoyment of the rich and diverse natural and cultural 

resources, educational and interpretive programs, scientific research, and to safeguard this 

heritage for future generations.” 
10 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

REFUGE GOALS 

Broad goals are proposed for the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge. They are consistent with the 

refuge purpose, ecosystem goals, Refuge System goals, Refuge System Improvement Act of 

1997, Service policy and guidance, and international treaties. For each goal, the refuge has 

developed management principles and guidelines to help focus the development of objectives 

and strategies to obtain the goal. These principles and guidelines are presented below, following 

the goals to which they apply. 

Goal 1: Conserve, enhance, and restore native plant communities and wetland habitats and their 

associated fish, wildlife, and plants, representative of the native biological diversity that would 

have been found on Vieques Refuge lands prior to major agricultural and military use of the 

lands. 

y Healthy, high-quality habitats are keys to healthy fish and wildlife populations. 

y Restoration of native conditions is a desired direction for management but may not always be 

achieved in the short term because soils or other environmental factors may be altered so 

they no longer support native species. 

y Both active and passive management approaches will be used to restore and maintain native 

conditions. 

y Forest habitat management goals and objectives will take longer than the life of this plan (15 

years) to achieve. 

y Native assemblages of wildlife are best maintained and restored by aiming to provide native 

habitat diversity typical of the ecoregion prior to agricultural clearing, development, and 

military uses. 

Goal 2: Monitor, protect, and recover special status animals, plants, and species of management 

interest. 

y Wildlife monitoring and inventories will be conducted to develop baseline information and 

detect changes in the populations. 

y Wildlife populations will be managed primarily through habitat management. 

y The needs of wildlife have priority over public uses of the refuge. 

Goal 3: Provide opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation and education to enhance public 

appreciation, understanding, and enjoyment of refuge wildlife, habitats, and cultural history. 

y Wildlife-dependent recreational activities, as identified in the Refuge System Improvement Act 

of 1997, will be given priority consideration over other uses. These activities are hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and 

interpretation. 

y Existing public uses may continue if they are determined to be compatible with the wildlife 

objectives for the refuge or if they offer increased wildlife-dependent recreational 

opportunities. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 11

Goal 4: Through cooperative efforts with partners, ensure the refuge is cleaned of all classes of 

contaminants that could pose a threat to the health and safety of the wildlife, residents, staff, and visitors. 

y Effective natural resource management, wildlife-dependent recreational uses, and other 

potential uses of the refuge cannot be realized without a comprehensive clean-up of 

unexploded ordnance and other contaminants that remain from prior uses of the lands. 

y Current efforts under the provisions of CERCLA are being carried out to address the 

contaminant issues on the areas currently being managed as the Vieques Refuge. 

y Prior to initiation of management or opening of contaminated portions of the refuge to public 

uses, the lands must be certified as safe for the proposed use. 

y Clean-up activities will likely continue beyond the time frame of this comprehensive 

conservation plan. 

Goal 5: Provide the resources needed to implement the selected management alternative and 

ensure the other goals and objectives identified in the plan can be achieved. 

y Effective management of wildlife, habitat, public uses and conducting other resource 

management activities require personnel, equipment, and facilities. 

y The levels of staffing and facilities necessary for each alternative are dependent on the 

proposed activities and programs. 

Goal 6: Develop effective and open means of communication with Vieques citizens, interested 

groups, and organizations to raise public awareness of refuge programs, management decisions, and 

the mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Wildlife Refuge System.

y Effective management of the refuge resources and compatible public uses require that the 

community is aware of the resources, their relationship to the community, and the 

management goals of the refuge. 

y Support for, input to, and assistance with the development of refuge programs can only be 

gained if the community is fully informed of the refuge’s management goals, plans, and 

proposals. 

THE COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLANNING PROCESS 

The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act requires that a comprehensive conservation plan 

be in place for each refuge by the year 2012, and that the public have an opportunity for active 

involvement in plan development and revision. It is Service policy that plans are developed in an open 

public process and that the agency is committed to securing public input throughout the process. 

The process followed for development of this CCP/EIS is guided by the Fish and Wildlife Manual 

(Part 602 FW2.1, November 1996) and policy related to the Refuge System Improvement Act. Steps 

in document development include: 1) preplanning; 2) identifying issues and developing vision; 3) 

gathering information; 4) analyzing resource relationships; 5) developing alternatives and assessing 

environmental effects; 6) identifying a proposed alternative; and 7) publishing the draft plan. After 

publication of the Draft CCP/EIS, the next steps in the process are to document and address public 

comments on the Draft CCP/EIS, prepare the Final CCP/EIS, secure its approval, and then 

implement the plan. 
12 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

The goals of the planning process are: 

 

y To ensure that wildlife comes first in the National Wildlife Refuge System and that each refuge 

is managed to help fulfill the mission of the Refuge System, maintain the ecological integrity of 

each refuge and the Refuge System, and achieve the specific purposes for which the refuge 

was established. 

y To provide a clear and comprehensive statement of desired conditions for each refuge or 

planning unit. 

y To encourage use of an ecosystem approach in refuge planning. This includes conducting 

concurrent planning for refuges within the same watershed or ecosystem and considering the 

broader goals and objectives of the refuges’ ecosystems and watersheds when developing 

management direction (see Ecosystem Approach to Fish and Wildlife Conservation [Part 052

of the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual]). 

y To support management decisions and their rationale by using a thorough assessment of 

available science derived from scientific literature, on-site refuge data, expert opinion, and 

sound professional judgment. 

y To ensure that the six priority wildlife-dependent recreational uses receive priority 

consideration. 

y To provide a forum for the public to comment on the type, extent, and compatibility of uses on 

refuges, including priority wildlife-dependent recreational uses. 

y To provide a uniform basis for budget requests for operational, maintenance, and capital 

improvement programs. 

y To ensure public involvement in refuge management decisions by providing a process for 

effective coordination, interaction, and cooperation with affected parties, including federal 

agencies, state conservation agencies, tribal governments, local governments, conservation 

organizations, adjacent landowners, and interested members of the public. 

The planning process for the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge is following the procedures of the 

Service and attempts to achieve these goals to the greatest extent possible. The process began in 

September 2003, with the publication of a notice of intent in the Federal Register (68 FR 52418) to 

prepare a Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement for Vieques 

National Wildlife Refuge. Subsequently, a core planning team was assembled to begin the process 

of identifying needs and direction for the development of the comprehensive plan. 

In order to include the issues and concerns of the community during the development of the plan for 

Vieques Refuge, a public involvement strategy was initiated. The major intent of the public involvement 

efforts was to provide an opportunity for a broad spectrum of the community and refuge visitors to 

understand the refuge purposes and provide input during plan development. To accomplish this, the 

planning team organized an Open House to introduce the community and visitors to the refuge and to 

announce upcoming planning activities. The Open House was held on July 10, 2004. This introduction 

to the refuge and the planning process was followed by more formal scoping meetings designed to 

provide an opportunity for interested parties to identify issues they would like to see addressed in the 

Draft CCP/EIS. The scoping meetings were held on August 19, 2004, and on November 10, 2004. 

Additional meetings were held with a variety of organizations on Vieques to explain the rationale for the 

development of the Draft CCP/EIS and to solicit comments on the issues and concerns from the 

organizations or their members individually. Throughout the scoping process, the community and other 

interested parties were provided with an opportunity to document their concerns and identify their 

preferred uses of the refuge. To facilitate this effort, comment sheets were provided during the 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 13

 open house, scoping meetings, at informational gatherings, and through web sites. After receipt of 

input from the interested public, the core planning team began formulating specific goals, objectives, 

and strategies to address each of the envisioned alternatives for the refuge. 

Upon release of the Draft CCP/EIS, public meetings, as well as press releases and electronic media, 

were used to provide opportunities for comment. At the conclusion of a 60-day period of public 

review, all substantive comments were addressed and are included in this document; 30 days after 

distribution of this Final CCP/EIS a Record of Decision will be recorded in the Federal Register and 

the plan will be finalized. Implementation of the preferred alternative can then begin. 

ISSUES, CONCERNS, AND OPPORTUNITIES 

Key issues and concerns to be addressed during the planning process were initially identified by the 

core planning team. Subsequently, during the public scoping process, these issues were modified 

based on the comments and input from the public and cooperating agencies (Table 1). The refuge 

goals, along with the issues and concerns identified by the planning team, the public, and 

cooperators, form the basis for the development and comparison of alternatives presented in this 

document. The issues are arranged in accordance with the refuge goals and are not necessarily in 

priority order. 

The generally recognized precept for management of national wildlife refuges is that protection and 

management of wildlife and habitat are the primary functions. Within this concept, there are several 

issues of importance to the Vieques Refuge as a component of the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

The natural systems that evolved in Vieques have been altered dramatically over the years. 

Management to achieve some level of restoration of the natural habitats and species composition will 

necessitate active manipulation of some environmental components. The types of habitat 

manipulation and management that can be conducted are affected by several factors, including 

unexploded ordnance, contaminated areas, invasive species, and the presence of historical and 

archaeological sites. 

While addressing some of the issues identified may require significant alteration of the existing 

conditions, others may only require monitoring, some form of documentation, or minor management 

activities. A major goal of identifying the issues and alternatives to be considered during the 

development of this plan is to ensure that the management program for the refuge is balanced and 

effectively addresses the needs of both the resources and the human users. 

Table 1. Issues identified during scoping 

Removal of Contaminants (Clean-up) 

Habitat Management 

Restoration of forest habitats 

Restoration of lagoon hydrology 

Grassland management 

Beach erosion 

Biological monitoring 

Invasive/exotic plant control 

Feral animal control 

Fire management 

Cooperative research opportunities 
14 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Removal of Contaminants (Clean-up) 

Species Management 

Endangered species management 

Sea turtles 

Listed plants 

Wading birds 

Waterfowl 

Sea birds 

Other migratory birds 

Amphibians and reptiles 

Mammals 

Invertebrates 

Public Uses 

Land crabbing 

Access (Hours the refuge is open) 

Hunting 

Use of off road vehicles 

Hiking trails 

Biking trails 

Horseback riding 

Grazing 

Camping 

Night fishing 

Commercial activities 

Kayaking 

Law enforcement activities 

ISSUES OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THIS CCP/EIS 

During the scoping phase for the Draft CCP/EIS development, one of the issues identified by 

members of the local community was the desire for the transfer of the refuge lands or portions 

of the refuge lands to the people or municipality of Vieques. The legislation that mandated the 

establishment of the refuge specifically stated that any transfer would require that additional 

legislation be enacted by Congress. Without specific congressional approval, consideration of 

land transfers is beyond the authority of the agency; and therefore is not considered in this 

planning document. 

Another issue outside of the scope of this document that was identified during the planning 

process was the proposed zoning classifications to permit residential or tourism-related 

development on the refuge. 

Additional issues are discussed in Chapter III entitled, “Actions or Proposals Considered but not Fully 

Developed.” 

PLAN AMENDMENT AND REVISION 

The Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Vieques National Wildlife Refuge will cover a period of 15 

years. After this time, it will be reviewed periodically, at least every 5 years, to determine if there is a 

need for revision. In keeping with the Service’s approach to adaptive management, amendments or 

revisions will be initiated if and when significant information indicating a need for a change in 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 15

management direction or policy becomes available. The final plan will be augmented by detailed 

step-down management plans addressing specific strategies that support refuge goals and 

objectives. To ensure the availability of information that identifies effectiveness or impacts associated 

with the strategies identified in this plan, specific procedures for inventory and monitoring will be 

identified in the step-down plans. Revisions of the plan and/or the step-down management plans that 

result in alterations of the impacts identified in this document and that may significantly affect the 

quality of the human environment would be subject to further National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) compliance. 

LEGAL AND POLICY GUIDANCE 

Starting with the first refuge, Florida’s Pelican Island, established in 1903 by President Theodore 

Roosevelt, the National Wildlife Refuge System has grown to more than 92 million acres in size. It 

includes more than 540 refuges, at least one in every state, and over 3,000 waterfowl production 

areas. The needs of wildlife and their habitats come first on refuges, in contrast to other public lands 

managed for multiple uses. This principle is found throughout the guidance provided for 

administration of the National Wildlife Refuge System. The provisions of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement Act include the mission statement for the Refuge System, the designation of 

priority public uses, and a requirement that the environmental health of the Refuge System be 

maintained (Appendix III). 

In addition to the above guidance provided for all units of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the 

legislation that established the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge also provided specific direction for 

the management of the refuge. Public Law 106-398 directs the Secretary of the Interior to administer 

the western Vieques lands “as wildlife refuges under the National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.). It also established the requirement that the 

Secretary of the Interior manage the conservation zones transferred from the Navy in accordance 

with a cooperative agreement to be developed among the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Puerto 

Rico Conservation Trust, and the Secretary of the Interior. That agreement (Appendix III) was 

finalized on April 26, 2001. In accordance with the agreement, the “Management Plan for the 

Western Vieques Conservation Areas” was prepared and published in November 2002. The 

management plan provided several objectives for conservation, research, restoration, education and 

interpretation, outreach and public involvement, and recreation. These objectives and associated 

proposals were incorporated into the planning for this CCP/EIS. 

In addition to the guidance provided in Public Law 106-398, further direction for the management of the 

refuge was provided when it was amended by Public Law 107-107. The amendments specifically 

stated that “the Secretary of the Interior shall retain, and may not dispose of any of the properties 

transferred under paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (b) and shall administer such properties as 

wildlife refuges under the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd 

et seq.) pending the enactment of a law that addresses the disposition of such properties.” It further 

stated that “the Secretary of the Interior shall assume responsibility for the administration of the Live 

Impact Area upon transfer under paragraph (1) of subsection (b), administer that area as a wilderness 

area under the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), and deny public access to the area.” 

The portions of Public Law 106-398 and the amendments (Public Law 107-107) related to the refuge 

lands on Vieques are included in Section B, Appendix III. 

Since significant portions of the refuge lands have been included as part of the Vieques “Superfund 

site” identified under CERCLA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, as the land management agency 

responsible for future management activities, will work as an integral part of the team developing the 
16 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

clean-up plans and priorities. Under CERCLA, the team includes representatives from the Navy, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

The role of each of the parties will be identified in a “Federal Facilities Agreement” that is currently 

being developed. 

Additional guidance is available in documents developed by the commonwealth and municipal agencies. 

These include documents such as the Vieques Culebra Master Plan for Sustainable Development, the 

Puerto Rico Planning Board proposed zoning classification, and Puerto Rico’s Comprehensive Wildlife 

Conservation Strategy (currently in draft). Where the long-term plans and management strategies 

identified in these documents are appropriate and compatible with the refuge purposes, they may be 

incorporated into this plan or the management programs of the refuge. The primary focus of the refuge, 

however, is to help fulfill the agency mission and the legislated purposes of the refuge. 

 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 17

II. Description of the Affected Environment 

INTRODUCTION 

This chapter provides a description of the environment, the natural and cultural resources, and the 

general setting of the refuge. The intent is to give the reviewers of this document and those who 

make decisions about the management alternatives the necessary background to understand the 

impacts that may occur as a result of their decisions. 

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 

CLIMATE 

The climate in Vieques is classified as “tropical-marine.” The easterly trade winds are the dominant 

factor affecting the climate of Puerto Rico and the rest the Antilles islands. The temperature in 

Vieques remains relatively constant throughout the year, with an annual average temperature of 78 

degrees Fahrenheit (°F). The average high temperatures in the summer months are about 89°F. 

During the winter, the average high is approximately 84°F. The average low temperatures vary even 

less with only about a 3-4°F difference between summer and winter. 

Due to the topography of the island and the easterly trade winds, there is generally a higher 

precipitation on the north side of the hills on the western end of the island than there is on the eastern 

and southern portions of the island. The eastern end of the island receives an average of 25.2 inches 

per year and the western end receives an average of 49.2 inches per year (Figure 3). Although the 

annual average rainfall in Esperanza is approximately 38 inches, the average for the entire island is 

approximately 43 inches. Of this amount, the island receives about half during the rainy season 

(August to November), with September being the rainiest month. Approximately 15 percent of the 

total annual precipitation falls during September. March is the driest month, with an average 

precipitation of less than 2 inches. 

The normal dry season extends from December through July. During May, June, and July, localized 

thunderstorms are relatively common and tropical storms move through the Caribbean from June to 

November (hurricane season). Tropical storms can affect the regional climate for several days. 

Hurricanes occur at Vieques Island at a frequency of one every one to two years (National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration 2000), usually occurring during August and September. 

In September 2003, Vieques received 25.75 inches of rain in only 36 hours. That is considered to be 

a 100-year rain frequency event. By the other hand, in March 2005, Puerto Rico (including Vieques) 

experienced an extraordinary drought that became a major fire hazard anywhere subtropical dry 

forest dominated. Vieques reported 62 wild fires, which required immediate suppression response. 

Several fires occurred on refuge lands. 

TOPOGRAPHY 

A series of rolling hills and peaks, and narrow, low-lying coastal zones characterize the topography of 

Vieques. Generally, the hills on the western portion of the island are more gentle and rolling than the 

rest of the island and possess a deeper soil profile (Figure 4). The hills on the eastern end of the 

island are more angular and rugged in appearance and have more exposed rock surfaces (Figure 5). 

The central hills are generally steeper on the northern faces versus the more gradual southern 
18 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 3. Vieques average monthly rainfall 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 19 Monte Pirata Cerro El Buey 0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles 0 0.5 1 Playa 

μ

0.25 Kilometers

Punta Arenas

(Green Beach)

301 m

987 ft

Punta Vaca

ROTHR

Site

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustROTHRLagoons

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryIntermitent Streams10 meter contour

Punta Arenas

Punta Boca 

Quebrada

Playa 

Grande

Laguna

Boca Quebrada

Laguna

Playa Grande

Laguna

Kiani

Laguna

Punta Arenas Laguna El Pobre

Figure 4. Vieques topographic map (west) 
20 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 5. Vieques topographic map (east) Cerro Bone Peñasco Fosil Cerro Palomas

Cerro Caracas

Cerro Camacho

Cerro Farallon

Cerro Playuela

Cerro Amargura

Cerro Malojillo

Cerro del Muerto

Cerro Matias Jalobre

μ 012 0.5 Miles

012 0.5 Kilometers

Puerto 

Ferro

Playa Caracas

(Red Beach)

Playa La Chiva

(Blue Beach)

Isla Chiva

Berdiales

Bahía 

Tapón

Camp Garcia

Punta Conejo

Cayo Yanuel

Ensenada Honda

Bahía Fanduca

Bahía Jolova

Playa Matías

(Yellow Beach) Cayo

Conejo

RocaAlcatraz

Bahia Salina 

del Sur

Tamarindo

Sur

Punta

Este

Playa

Blanca

Punta

Salinas

Playa 

Brava

Bahia 

Icacos

Isla

Yallis

Puerto 

Diablo

Punta 

Brigadier Punta 

Goleta Puerto Negro

Punta 

Campanilla

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustLagoons

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryIntermitent Stream10 meter contour
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 21

slopes. Several low-lying coastal zones are located on the island. The largest zones are located 

near the northwestern corner of the island, near the eastern end of the island (north of Bahía Salina 

del Sur), and in the southern valley between Esperanza and Bahía Tapón (U.S. Geological Survey 

1982). The highest elevations are found on the western portion of the island, declining along an axis 

that runs through the center of the island to the east. The highest peak on the island is Monte Pirata, 

which lies near the western end of the island at an elevation of 984 feet above mean sea level. 

GEOLOGY 

The general geological profile for Vieques is described as granitic volcanic rock and marine 

sedimentary rocks overlain by alluvial deposits. The prominent volcanic rock is Late Cretaceousaged andesite, which was deposited in a marine environment (Glover 1971). Later in the 

Cretaceous, a plutonic complex intruded the andesite. From west to east, the texture of the pluton 

gradually changes from coarse to fine-grained quartz-diorite (Figure 6). Patches of limestone are 

found in Vieques, mostly in the northern, southern, and eastern coastal areas (U.S. Geological 

Survey 1980). The limestone is yellow and well weathered at the surface (Figure 7). 

Quaternary-aged valley and alluvial deposits are found in the Esperanza and Resolucion valleys. 

These deposits consist of mixtures of sand, silt, and clay. According to well logs and geophysical 

data, the thickness of the sedimentary deposits ranges from 0 to 98 feet. A basal clay unit (with a 

maximum thickness of 16 feet) exists above the granitic quartz-diorite. A deposit of interbedded sand 

and silt overlies the clay, with a maximum thickness of approximately 66 feet. The uppermost unit 

consists largely of sand and silt colluvium, with the sand predominating towards the coastal areas 

(Glover 1971). Unconsolidated beach and dune deposits are found in the coastal areas in the 

northwestern part of the island and to the south in Esperanza Valley along the Quebrada La Mina 

(Miller et al. 1999). These sand-sized deposits consist mainly of calcite, quartz, volcanic rock 

fragments, and minor deposits of magnetite. Erosion is prevalent along the major stream channels 

that empty into coastal areas, due to the presence of the easily erodible deposits, human disturbance 

and destabilization of the soils, and periodic storm events. 

SOILS 

Soils on the refuge are described in the Soil Survey of Humacao Area of Eastern Puerto Rico

(Boccheciamp 1977). Contained within the eastern and western refuge lands are portions of four 

different soil associations (Figures 8 and 9). These consist of the Descalabrado-Guayama 

association, Coamo-Guamani-Vives association, and Swamps-Marshes association, and the 

Pandura-Rock land-Patillas association. These four soil associations are described by Boccheciamp 

(1977) as follows: 

y The Descalabrado-Guayama association consists of soils that formed in moderately finetextured to fine residual material derived from basic volcanic rocks. These soils are shallow, 

well-drained, and strongly sloping to very steep. The soils of this association are used for 

pasture or are in brush. They have severe limitations for farming, recreation, and urban uses 

because they are shallow to bedrock, lack sufficient moisture, are steep, and are susceptible 

to erosion. 

y The Coamo-Guamani-Vives association consists of soils that formed in sediment derived from 

limestone and volcanic rocks. The Coamo soils are deep, well-drained, and nearly level to 

strongly sloping, and they occur on terraces. The Guamani soils are shallow to sand and 

gravel, well-drained, and nearly level, and they occur on floodplains. The Vives soils are 

deep, well-drained, and nearly level to strongly sloping, and they are found on floodplains, 

alluvial fans, and terraces. 
22 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 6. Vieques geological features (west) 

Monte Pirata

Cerro El Buey

0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles

0 0.5 1

Playa 



0.25 Kilometers

Punta Arenas

(Green Beach)

301 m

987 ft

Punta Vaca

ROTHR

Site

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustROTHRLagoons

Geology

Ktd- Plutonic RocksKv- Sandstone, Siltstone, Conglomerate Lava, Tuff, Tuffaceous BrecciaQa- Alluvial DepositsQb- Beach and Dune DepositsQs- Swamp and Marsh DepositsTl- Marine Sedimentary Rocks

Not SurveyedVieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryFault LineIntermitent Stream

Punta Arenas

Punta Boca 

Quebrada

Playa 

Grande

Laguna

Kiani

Laguna

Punta Arenas Laguna El Pobre

Laguna

Boca Quebrada

Laguna

Playa Grande
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 23

Figure 7. Vieques geological features (east) Cerro Bone Peæasco Fosil Cerro Palomas

Cerro Caracas

Cerro Camacho

Cerro Farallon

Cerro Playuela

Cerro Amargura

Cerro Malojillo

Cerro del Muerto

Cerro Matias Jalobre



Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustLagoons

Geology

Ktd- Plutonic RocksKv- Sandstone, Siltstone, Conglomerate Lava, Tuff, Tuffaceous BrecciaQa- Alluvial DepositsQb- Beach and Dune DepositsQs- Swamp and Marsh DepositsTl- Marine Sedimentary RocksNot Surveyed

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryFault LineIntermitent Stream

012 0.5 Miles012 0.5 Kilometers

Puerto 

Ferro

Playa Caracas

(Red Beach)

Playa La Chiva

(Blue Beach)

Isla Chiva

Berdiales

Baha 

Tapn

Camp Garcia

Punta Conejo

Cayo Yanuel

Ensenada Honda

Baha Fanduca

Baha Jolova

Playa Matas

(Yellow Beach) Cayo

Conejo

RocaAlcatraz

Bahia Salina 

del Sur

Tamarindo

Sur

Punta

Este

Playa

Blanca

Punta

Salinas

Playa 

Brava

Isla

Bahia 

Icacos

Yallis

Puerto 

Diablo

Punta 

Brigadier Punta 

Goleta Puerto Negro

Punta 

Campanilla
24 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 8. Vieques soils (west) 

0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles

0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles



Monte Pirata

Cerro El Buey

0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles

0 0.5 1

Playa 



0.25 Kilometers

Punta Arenas

(Green Beach)

301 m

987 ft

Punta Vaca

ROTHR

Site

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustLagoonsROTHRVieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryIntermitent Stream

Soil Series

Amelia gravelly clay loamCartagena clayCatalina clayCatano loamy sandCoamo clay loamCoastal beachDescalabrado and Guayama soil

Descalabrado clay loamDescalabrado-Rock land complexFraternidad clayJacana clayMade landPandura-Very stony land complexPaso seco clayPoncena clay

Pozo Blanco clay loamRock landSalt water marshSoil not surveyedTidal flatsTidal swampVieques loam

Not Surveyed

Punta Arenas

Punta Boca 

Quebrada

Playa 

Grande

Laguna

Kiani

Laguna

Punta Arenas Laguna El Pobre

Laguna

Boca Quebrada

Laguna

Playa Grande
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 25

Figure 9. Vieques soils (east) 



Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustLagoonsIntermitent StreamVieques National Wildlife Refuge Boundary

Soil Series

Amelia gravelly clay loamCartagena clayCatalina clayCatano loamy sandCoamo clay loamCoastal beach

Descalabrado and Guayama soilDescalabrado clay loamDescalabrado-Rock land complexFraternidad clayJacana clayMade landPandura-Very stony land complex

Paso seco clayPoncena clayPozo Blanco clay loamRock landSalt water marshSoil not surveyedTidal flats

Tidal swampVieques loamNot Surveyed

012 0.5 Miles012 0.5 Kilometers

Puerto 

Ferro

Playa Caracas

(Red Beach)

Playa La Chiva

(Blue Beach)

Isla Chiva

Berdiales

Baha 

Tapn

Camp Garcia

Punta Conejo

Cayo Yanuel

Ensenada Honda

Baha Fanduca

Baha Jolova

Playa Matas

(Yellow Beach) Cayo

Conejo

Roca

Alcatraz

Bahia Salina 

del Sur

Tamarindo

Sur

Punta

Este

Playa

Blanca

Punta

Salinas

Playa 

Brava

Isla

Bahia 

Icacos

Yallis

Puerto 

Diablo

Punta 

Brigadier Punta 

Goleta Puerto Negro

Punta 

Campanilla
26 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

y The Swamps-Marshes association is in level or nearly level, narrow strips adjacent to the 

ocean. The areas are slightly above sea level but are wet and, when the tide is high, are 

covered or affected by salt water or brackish water. The high concentration of salt inhibits the 

growth of all vegetation except mangrove trees and, in small, scattered patches, other salttolerant plants. The soils are sandy or clayey and contain organic material from decaying 

mangrove trees. They are underlain by coral, shells, and marl at varying depths. This 

association is not extensive and has no value for farming, but it serves as a feeding and 

breeding place for birds and crabs. 

y The Pandura-Rock land-Patillas association consists of shallow to deep, well-drained, steep 

and very steep soils on plutonic uplands. This association consists of brown colored soils 

formed in residual material weathered from plutonic rocks. Pandura soils are moderately 

deep and well-drained and are underlain by granitic rocks. Rock land consists of 50 to 70 

percent cover by granitic boulders. Patillas soils are moderately deep to saprolite, are welldrained and are underlain by partly weathered granitic rocks. Soils of this association are 

used mainly for food crops and native grasses. Steep slopes and shallow depth of bedrock 

are limitations for farming, recreation, and urban uses. 

Within these associations, there are twenty soil series that have been identified on the Vieques 

National Wildlife Refuge. The descriptions of the soil series found on the refuge are provided in 

Appendix V. 

HYDROLOGY 

The hydrology of small tropical islands differs from that of temperate, continental areas. In the West 

Indies, precipitation, the origin of all freshwater resources, is controlled principally by the easterly 

trade winds, the passage of tropical storms, and orographic effects in the islands with high relief. The 

geology, topography, and relative size of the islands determine the degree to which they collect and 

retain the rainfall that ultimately provides island water supplies (U.S.Geological Survey, Zack, Allen 

and M. C. Larsen 1994). 

Long-term climate change in the Caribbean may be causing gradual, but significant, hydrologic 

depletions that began several centuries ago, with islands of low elevation exhibiting the most obvious 

depletions. The reduced streamflow and diminished groundwater supplies may be attributed to 

decreasing rainfall over the tropical oceans, islands, and coastal areas since the industrial revolution. 

Oral history indicates that perennial streams occurred on the island of Vieques several centuries ago. 

Fresh groundwater supplies in the Esperanza Valley have gradually diminished during the past 200 

years even though groundwater withdrawals have remained relatively constant. The potable water 

supply for Vieques is derived from the Río Blanco, on the main island of Puerto Rico. Vieques Island 

has very limited freshwater resources due to the climatic and physiographic conditions. There are 

numerous small watersheds ranging in size from 2.9 acres to 1,543.6 acres (Figure 10). 

There are four major watersheds present on the eastern refuge lands: Quebrada Hueca, Quebrada 

Amargura, Quebrada Marunguey, and an unnamed quebrada flowing into Bahía de la Chiva 

(Figure 11). Although there are reports of permanent streams on Vieques, the geology, which allows 

for increased infiltration and percolation to aquifers, and topography, which allows for rapid runoff, do 

not generally support the development of permanent freshwater streams. The National Wetlands 

Inventory map identifies and classifies potential wetlands, including streams and other water resource 

habitats. All streams on Vieques are classified as being temporarily flooded based on these maps. 

Temporarily flooded streams, also considered ephemeral streams, only contain water during and 

shortly after rainfall events. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 27

Figure 10. Vieques watersheds (west) 

Monte Pirata

Cerro El Buey

0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles

0 0.5 1

Playa 

μ

0.25 Kilometers

Punta Arenas

(Green Beach)

301 m

987 ft

Punta Vaca

ROTHR

Site

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustROTHR

LagoonsWetlandsVieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryIntermitent Streams10 meter contour interval

Punta Arenas

Punta Boca 

Quebrada

Playa 

Grande

Laguna

Kiani

Laguna

Punta Arenas Laguna El Pobre

Laguna

Boca Quebrada

Laguna

Playa Grande
28 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 11. Vieques watersheds (east) 

μ

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustLakes_Lagoons

WetlandsVieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryIntermitent Streams10 meter contour interval

012 0.5 Miles

012 0.5 Kilometers

Puerto 

Ferro

Playa Caracas

(Red Beach)

Playa La Chiva

(Blue Beach)

Isla Chiva

Berdiales

Bahía 

Tapón

Punta Conejo

Cayo Yanuel

Ensenada Honda

Bahía Fanduca

Bahía Jolova

Playa Matías

(Yellow Beach) Cayo

Conejo

RocaAlcatraz

Bahia Salina 

del Sur

Tamarindo

Sur

Punta

Este

Playa

Blanca

Punta

Salinas

Playa 

Brava

Bahia 

Icacos

Isla

Yallis

Puerto 

Diablo

Punta 

Goleta Puerto Negro

Camp Garcia

Punta 

Brigadier

Punta 

Campanilla

uQ

ebr a

a Mad nur yeug

dar beu Q

a mA

ar ugr a

u Q r be aceuH ada
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 29

AIR QUALITY 

The primary federal statute governing the control of air pollution is the Clean Air Act. This Act 

identifies six pollutants as “criteria pollutants.” These are: respirable particulate matter, carbon 

monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead, and ozone. Primary and/or secondary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards have been established to protect the public health and welfare and to 

account for the effects of air pollution on soil, water, visibility, vegetation, and other materials exposed 

to air pollution. The standards are included in Appendix III. The Clean Air Act requires state or local 

air quality control agencies to adopt State Implementation Plans. These plans prescribe measures to 

eliminate or reduce the severity and number of National Ambient Air Quality Standards’ violations and 

to achieve and/or maintain levels of the “criteria pollutants” at, or below, these standards. 

A single air quality control region covers Puerto Rico, including Vieques. Based on ambient 

monitoring data collected mainly in the San Juan vicinity by the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality 

Board, the Environmental Protection Agency classifies the air quality control region as in attainment 

or as unclassified/attainment (i.e., no data exist to determine the status for the six National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards criteria pollutants). Therefore, air pollutant concentrations are below these 

standards for all criteria pollutants (EPA 2000a). 

Under the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments (42 USC 7476[c]), federal actions are required to conform 

to the applicable State Implementation Plans. The criteria and procedures used to demonstrate 

conformity are explained in 40 CFR 51 (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 

Implementation Plans) and 40 CFR 93 (Determining Conformity of Federal Actions to State or 

Federal Implementation Plans). 

Currently, regulations for implementing the general conformity rule have been promulgated only for 

non-attainment areas. Because Puerto Rico is classified as in attainment of the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards for all pollutants, the general conformity rule is not applicable. Existing air pollutant 

emission sources at Vieques Refuge are minor and scattered widely. Air pollutants are emitted 

during occasional operation of power equipment, motor vehicles, and boats, and during vehicle use 

on unpaved roads throughout the refuge. 

CONTAMINANTS/HAZARDOUS MATERIAL 

CERCLA, commonly known as “Superfund,” was enacted by Congress on December 11, 1980. This 

law provided federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous 

substances that may endanger public health or the environment. CERCLA authorized two types of 

response actions: 1) short-term removals, where actions may be taken to address releases or 

threatened releases requiring prompt response; and, 2) long-term remedial response actions that 

permanently and significantly reduce the dangers associated with releases or threats of releases of 

hazardous substances that are serious, but not immediately life threatening. These actions can be 

conducted only at sites listed on the Environmental Protection Agency’s National Priorities List. In 

order to address the contaminants issues associated with the former utilization of Vieques for military 

training, the Governor requested that portions of Vieques be placed on the National Priorities List. In 

accordance with the request, Vieques was placed on this list on February 11, 2005. 

Western Vieques 

This area was administered by the Navy from the 1940s and development and utilization of various 

portions of the lands occurred over a 60-year period. As a result, there are small dumps and other 

undocumented sites in several areas of this former Navy property. While this area was not subject to 
30 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

any live fire from artillery or bombing, it did serve to store these items and there are more than 100 

ammunition bunkers throughout the area. In addition, an open burn/open disposal site was used to 

dispose of excess and unexploded ordnance. 

There are three documented contaminated sites on refuge lands. The open burn/open disposal area, 

also known as Solid Waste Management Unit 4, is about 100 acres in size and was used to dispose 

of ammunition. This area is located on a small hill facing Laguna Boca Quebrada to the north, the 

Caribbean Sea to the west, a small intermittent stream to the south, and woodlands to the east. The 

site is currently under investigation and several thousand items, mostly 20mm high explosive 

projectiles, have been found and disposed of properly. Metal and explosive compound contamination 

of the adjacent lagoon sediments and unexploded ordnance are concerns at this site. 

Another area, Solid Waste Management Unit 6, a dump area located in a mangrove, was 

documented in the years 1979, 1980, and 1986. It is located in a mangrove wetland adjacent to the 

Laguna Kiani channel on the Laguna El Pobre side, directly adjacent to the existing dirt road. The 

exact content of the dump is not known. Three crab samples taken from the site contained DDT, 

lead, and cadmium at or close to levels known to have an effect. This site is also under investigation 

by the Navy. 

Area of Concern J, another dump site, is the third known site on the western refuge unit, and is 

located just outside the existing refuge gate, adjacent to an intermittent stream and mangrove 

estuary. Service concerns center on impacts to the stream and estuary sediments by metals and 

other compounds. This site is also under investigation. 

Eastern Vieques 

Eastern Vieques was used by the U.S. Marine Corps, the U.S. Army, and the Puerto Rico National Guard 

for maneuvers since the 1950s. Amphibious landings, parachute drops, artillery, tank, and infantry 

maneuvers were practiced year-round. In the 1960s, the Navy transferred its naval gunnery and air-toground practices to Vieques and established the Live Impact Area. Naval activities continued at this site 

until 2003. Because of its prolonged and intense use, this area has more sites. Close to 100 sites have 

been identified, including the Solid Waste Management Units, Photo Identified sites, Areas of Concern, 

and Potential Areas of Concern, plus the known small arms ranges, gun positions, and the Surface and 

Live Impact Areas. The degree of contamination of soil/sediment or biota by metals and other 

contaminants in many of these sites is yet to be determined. 

Contaminant concerns in east Vieques include metal and explosive compound levels in soil and 

sediments, especially in lagoon sediments, since many of the lagoons in east Vieques are natural 

sediment basins. The Service is also concerned with the possible presence of pesticide residue 

levels of organochlorine pesticides, as these were used heavily during the 1950s and 1960s for 

mosquito control. 

The presence of unexploded ordnance is an issue due to the use of this area for numerous types of 

military maneuvers. Because of the possible presence of unexploded ordnance, currently about 

10,000 acres of the eastern refuge lands are closed to the public. As the clean-up progresses, 

additional lands will be opened for management and appropriate public use activities. 

See Figure 12 for the opened/closed areas for both the western and eastern portions of the refuge. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 31

Figure 12. Opened/closed areas 

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge Open AreasVieques National Wildlife Refuge Closed AreasROTHR

Municipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustVieques NWR Refuge Limits



024 1 Kilometers

024 1 Miles
32 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

AESTHETICS 

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge occupies significant portions of eastern and western Vieques Island. 

Major portions of these lands were cleared for agricultural purposes and were later used for military 

purposes. As a result of the agricultural clearing and subsequent abandonment, these lands are now 

predominantly vegetated with subtropical dry forest composed of a mix of native and introduced 

species. While there has been limited development on the refuge, there are still remains of structures 

from the agricultural and military activities of the past. Most significant is the development at Camp 

Garcia, where the military maintained a compound with numerous facilities to support its activities. The 

Observation Post near the east end of the island is one of the most noticeable structures remaining. 

Visitors to the refuge will find limited facilities, including a boardwalk trail and informational kiosk at 

Kiani Lagoon and beach shelters on Caracas Beach and La Chiva Beach. At the present time, major 

portions of the refuge are closed to public access because of the potential hazards of unexploded 

ordnance from previous military training activities. The open roads that provide public access into the 

refuge are not conducive to hiking or nature observation because any passing vehicle will raise a dust 

cloud. Hiking or seeking solitude in the off-road areas would be very difficult because of the 

abundance of thorny dry forest vegetation. 

The beaches that are open to public access are considered by many to be some of the most beautiful 

in the world and are aesthetically one of the greatest attractions to the area. In addition to the 

beaches, a casual observer will also note a series of lagoon systems with associated salt flats, 

wetlands, and surrounding mangrove forests, as well as expanses of sub-tropical dry and moist 

forests and hills rising from the shores. The biological resources discussed in the next section also 

provide an aesthetic appeal to many visitors. 

ROADS, UTILITIES, AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge is divided into the western and eastern tracts that are accessible by 

land though four main entrances and three secondary entrances that lead to various roads. There 

are approximately 100 kilometers (57 miles) of roads throughout the combined east and west portions 

of the refuge. Approximately 70 kilometers (44 miles) of roads are located on the east tract and 30 

kilometers (19 miles) are on the west tract. There are numerous buildings and other structures and 

utilities that were on the lands when transferred to the administration of the refuge. The following 

provides a general description of the infrastructure found on the refuge. 

Western Refuge Lands 

The western tract of the refuge can be divided into three sections. The first section on the northern 

side is referred to as Punta Arenas. Entering the main gate (the refuge is officially closed from dusk 

until 6 a.m.) there are approximately 3.5 kilometers (2 miles) of public access roads that lead to the 

beaches. On the southern portion of this section there is a 1.6-kilometer (1 mile) side road used to 

access the power lines that carry power from the Puerto Rico mainland to Vieques. On the main road 

from the gate towards Punta Arenas (Green) Beach, there is one side access road that leads to a 

natural boat ramp, a small concrete building that houses the main valve for the water supply to 

Vieques (the building and the access to this site are part of an easement agreement between the 

Service and the Puerto Rico Water Utilities Company), two steel Bailey bridges, one interpretive 

kiosk, a short boardwalk onto Kiani lagoon, and one public use beach gazebo. 

All the public use sites have parking available to accommodate vehicles for the visiting public. The 

Service has also installed several 55-gallon plastic trash containers in and around the main public 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 33

sites. There are two fenced areas within the Punta Arenas area that are restricted from public use. 

The first restricted area for public use is where the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority has a large 

fenced-in transformer that distributes the electrical power for the main island to Vieques. The area 

where the transformer is located, along with the two main access roads, is part of an easement 

between the Service and the Power Authority. The second restricted area is Solid Waste 

Management Unit 4, which comprises approximately 400 acres starting at the canal of Boca 

Quebrada Lagoon, continuing inland in a circular manner, and finishing back at the coast. This area 

is closed to the public due to the potential dangers of unexploded ordnance. Also in this area is a 

small section of railroad track that dates back to the days of sugarcane farming. In addition to the 

potentially historic track, there are three large containers that were used during the same time period 

to store molasses before shipping it to the main island of Puerto Rico. Near the beach gazebo there 

are remains of a historic pier used during the sugarcane era. 

The second or central section is referred to as the Mt. Pirata area. The road that leads to this main 

entrance starts on municipal lands and remains open to the public until it encounters a closed gate. 

From there the road leads to fenced area on the top of Mt. Pirata. The area contains a helicopter 

landing area, three small concrete buildings (electrical power is available to this site), and two large 

transmission towers. This area is maintained and used by the Department of Homeland Security as a 

communications site in accordance with an agreement between the Service and Home Security. The 

approximately 4-kilometer (2.5 miles) road from the boundary of the refuge to the top of Mt. Pirata is 

the only completely paved road segment on the refuge. 

The third or southern section starts south of the Mt. Pirata area and ends on the shoreline. This 

section is commonly referred to as the Playa Grande area. There are more than 10 kilometers (6 

miles) of roads across the southern section, however, most of them are severely deteriorated and are 

closed to ensure public safety. Currently, there is approximately 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) of road from 

the main entrance on Playa Grande to the Playa Grande lagoon that is accessible to the public. 

Parking is available for the visiting public's vehicles at this area. There are a few remnants of old 

structures on this portion of the refuge, but there is no other infrastructure. 

Eastern Refuge Lands 

There is one land entrance onto the main road on the eastern tract of the refuge. The eastern tract is 

open to the public from 6 a.m. to dusk. Crossing this entrance there is also a road that runs north to 

south, which serves as a fire break between the refuge lands and the community areas in town. This 

road runs along approximately 15 kilometers (9 miles) of fence that establishes the boundary of the 

refuge. Of the approximately 70 kilometers (40 miles) of road located on this tract, only 17 kilometers 

(10 miles) are open and accessible to the general public. The remainders of the roads on the east 

tract of the refuge are currently located inside various areas that are restricted to the general public 

due to the dangers of unexploded ordinance. 

Inside the refuge, and next to main entrance, there is a small gazebo, a Fish and Wildlife Service 

welcome sign and a smaller sign that mentions permitted activities. Water mains, electrical utility 

poles, and telephone lines also enter the refuge from this point and parallel the main road for 

approximately 5 kilometers (3 miles), where they enter a fenced area formerly known as "Camp 

Garcia." Inside this area, there are currently fourteen buildings, most of which are unoccupied. The 

two largest are utility sheds that are used by the Service to house heavy equipment and other 

machinery. One of these buildings is an original stone structure that has historical value that dates 

from the time when these lands were used as sugarcane plantations. Outside and east of this fenced 

area there is one unoccupied concrete building. To the south of this area there are two public 

restrooms, one gazebo, an underground septic tank, and a 1-mile-long inactive aircraft runway. 
34 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Additional infrastructure in the areas open to the public include nine public use beach gazebos and 

three open grills on Caracas beach (Red beach), one aluminum Bailey Bridge over La Chiva lagoon, 

plus ten more beach gazebos on La Chiva beach (Blue beach) area. The Service has installed 

several 55-gallon trash drums throughout the open public areas, particularly on the sites leading to or 

on the edge of the beaches. There are also three natural and historic sites used as boat ramps on 

the public areas of the refuge. From west to east, the first public area is located on a small peninsula 

on Barracuda bay, the second is on the east side of La Chiva beach and the third is at the eastern 

most portion of la Plata beach within the bay of Ensenada Honda. The first two areas have additional 

parking and turnarounds created to accommodate vehicles towing boat trailers. All the beaches that 

are currently open and being used for public recreation have parking lot areas. Road accesses 

directly onto the beaches are blocked with various barriers (e.g., mostly boulders), since vehicular 

and horse traffic are not allowed on the beach. 

Four different gates to the north of the main road separate the public areas from the currently 

restricted areas. Inside the restricted areas there are seven unoccupied concrete structures; the 

largest being Observation Post One. Utilities for these structures are not currently operational. 

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

FAUNA 

Terrestrial and marine animals on Vieques are common all over mainland Puerto Rico whenever 

suitable habitat for the species is available. The native terrestrial component is comprised mostly of 

birds, reptiles, and amphibians and some bat species. The marine animal component is largely 

composed of near shore and pelagic fish species, sea turtles, marine mammals, mollusks, and 

crustaceans. 

Birds 

Over 150 bird species, including migratory and resident, have been reported to occur on Vieques 

(Department of the Navy 1986, Sorrie 1978, D. Gemill, personal comm.; and personal observations). 

Of those, at least 14 species are marine seabirds that use the near-shore/off-shore marine habitats to 

feed. These birds use rocky shores, cliffs, cays, sandy beaches, and lagoons to nest and/or roost. 

During the island-wide bird census, conducted in 2005 (by refuge staff and in cooperation with the 

Puerto Rican Ornithological Society), four species were reported for the first time on Vieques. 

Preliminary surveys seem to indicate that the lagoons and the mostly undisturbed tracts of land 

managed by the refuge provide important nesting and foraging habitats for both resident and migratory 

species. Vieques is the largest land mass that bridges the gap between the Greater and Lesser 

Antilles. Because of its natural areas and geographical location, it appears to be a very important 

resting stopover for several bird species as they migrate between North and South America. 

In 2001, the Service started a bird banding program on the refuge. This study began as part of an 

overall Service program across other national wildlife refuges in the Caribbean complex. In 

collaboration with the Smithsonian, the refuge study provided data to search for west Nile virus and 

today it continues as an important bi-annual survey to monitor species on the refuge. The birds that 

occur in Vieques can be divided into four groups: land birds, wading birds, waterfowl, and sea birds. 

Appendix V includes a list of the bird species found on Vieques. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 35

Land Birds 

This is the largest and most diverse group within the refuge, accounting for more than 80 species. 

The numbers in this group fluctuate throughout the year due to the spring and fall migrations. These 

birds are primarily found in the semi-arid areas that cover most of the eastern tract of the refuge, but 

they also occur in the more humid areas on the western tract of the refuge. They inhabit mangroves, 

upland forests, lowland forests, gallery forests, barren areas, grasslands, evergreen scrub, beach 

scrub, mixed thorn, and low scrub. Representatives of this group include the Ground Dove, Zenaida 

Dove, Scaly-napped Pigeon, White-winged Dove, White-crowned Dove, Gray Kingbird, Caribbean 

Elaenia, Mangrove Cuckoo, Smooth-billed Ani, Belted Kingfisher, Puerto Rican Woodpecker, Blackfaced Grassquit, Bananaquit, Greater Antillean Grackle, Yellow Warbler, Adelaide's Warbler, Puerto 

Rican Vireo, Green-throated Carib, Antillean Crested Hummingbird, Grasshopper Sparrow, Peregrine 

Falcon, American Kestrel, Red-tailed Hawk, and others. 

Wading Birds 

With approximately 30 or more species, wading birds make up the second largest group of bird species 

found in the refuge. This category loosely groups marsh birds, shorebirds, egrets, and herons. With the 

exception of cattle egrets that accompany feral horses and cattle along all habitats, the majority of wading 

birds in the refuge are associated with mangrove-lagoon complexes and shorelines bordering the Vieques 

coast. Due to spring and fall migrations, the numbers of wading birds in the refuge also vary throughout 

the year. Most of these species are year-round residents in Vieques, whose numbers are usually 

augmented by winter migratory birds. According to preliminary surveys conducted by the Service on the 

shallow lagoons in the eastern and western tracts, the number of shore birds is greatly increased during 

the winter months. When coupled with the fact that several wintering areas across the Antilles have been 

degraded, the refuge might be an important resting and foraging area for these migratory species; similar 

to the Laguna Cartagena National Wildlife Refuge in western Puerto Rico. However, much more 

research is needed before drawing any conclusions. 

Greater Flamingos were once frequently found on the eastern tract of the refuge in the areas of 

Ensenada Honda, Punta Carenero, and Jalova. Flamingos are now only rare visitors to the area; 

hence, the Service might enter into cooperative agreements with other entities to reintroduce the 

species to its former range. Other representatives of the wading bird group include the Great Egret, 

Snowy Egret, Tricolored Heron, Little Blue Heron, Great Blue Heron, Yellow-crowned Heron, Least 

Bittern, Clapper Rail, Sora Rail, Common Moorhen, Caribbean Coot, Semipalmated Plover, Snowy 

Plover, Wilson's Plover, Killdeer, Common Snipe, Spotted Sandpiper, Lesser and Greater Yellowlegs, 

Semipalmated Sandpiper, Short-billed Dowitcher, Black-necked Stilt, and others. 

 

Waterfowl 

Waterfowl refers to swans, geese, and ducks, however, the first two are not present in Vieques, but 

ducks do occur as both resident and migratory species. The most frequently seen waterfowl species 

in the refuge is the White-cheeked Pintail. Although this duck, as well as other species, is generally 

more abundant in the lagoons with deeper waters on the eastern tract of the refuge, such as Monte 

Negro lagoon, it also occurs in lesser numbers in lagoons in the western tract, primarily Playa Grande 

and Kiani lagoons. The West Indian Whistling Duck and the Ruddy Duck are considered residents, 

while the Blue-winged Teal and the Lesser Scaup are winter migratory species. 
36 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Sea Birds 

The numbers for sea bird populations in Vieques remain relatively constant throughout the year. 

This group of birds mostly utilizes the rocky shores, limestone and other rocky cliffs, small islands or 

cays, sandy beaches, mangroves, and occasionally lagoons near the coast. Some species reside on 

the island while others occasionally fly over the land or the near shore waters. The largest nesting 

colony of the endangered brown pelican in Puerto Rico is located on Cayo Conejo (under 

Commonwealth jurisdiction) off the southeast coast of the refuge. This group is also represented by 

Boobies, Frigatebirds, Gulls, Oyster Catchers, Tropicbirds, and Terns. 

Reptiles and Amphibians 

The herpetofauna (amphibian and reptiles) on Vieques is composed of at least 22 species 

(Department of Defense 2000; refuge staff observations). These species include four species of 

marine sea turtles (three nest on Vieques), a native species of fresh water turtle, four frogs, 11 lizards 

and geckos, the Worm Snake (Typhlops richardii), and the Ground Snake (Alsophis spp.). Introduced 

species include the Cane Toad, Green Iguana, and Ball Python. 

Mammals 

Four species of bats have been identified on Vieques, plus the presence of three other species needs 

to be confirmed (Rodriguez-Duran 2000). Confirmed species are Noctilio leporinus, Artibeus 

jamaicensis, Molossus molussus and Stenoderma rufum. The species in question are Tadarida 

brasiliensis, Brachyphylla cavernarum, and Eptesicus fuscus. 

A number of marine mammals are known to occur in the near shore and the deep waters surrounding 

Vieques Island. These include the West Indian manatee, the sperm whale, the blue whale, 

humpback whale, the sei whale, and several dolphin species. 

Introduced animals include the mongoose, two species of rats, and a mouse. Free-ranging cattle and 

horses are common on the eastern and western parts of the refuge, as a result of a poorly managed 

grazing concession the Navy gave to a local rancher association. Most of the cattle and horses are 

inside restricted areas (areas closed due to the potential presence of unexploded ordnance), but 

refuge personnel allow for the removal of these animals whenever it is safe and possible. The 

deliberate abandonment of domestic animals (e.g., cats, dogs, chickens, and ducks) on refuge lands 

seems to be a more recent illegal activity. 

Aquatic organisms 

A diverse fish assemblage inhabits the costal waters around Vieques Island. Of the approximately 

800 species of fish known to occur in the coastal waters around Puerto Rico and surrounding islands 

(Causey et al. 2000), 242 species were recorded during the 1995 survey on Vieques and nearby St. 

Croix in the U.S. Virgin Islands (Department of Defense 2001). 

At least 12 species of crustaceans are known to occur on Vieques: the Spiny Lobster, two shrimp 

species (one estuarine, one fresh water), Mole Crab (Emerita portoricensis), Beach Crab (Hippia 

cubensis), Ghost Crab (Ocypode quadrata), Common Land Crab (Cardisoma guanhumi), “juey pelu” 

(Ucides cordatus), Fidler Crab (Uca spp.), Aratus pisonnii and Goniopsis cruentata. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 37

Seven species of marine or estuarine mollusks are known to occur on Vieques. They are the 

Octopus (Octopus spp.), Queen Conch (Strombus gigas), Coquina Clam (Donax denticulata), Oyster 

(Crassostrea rhizophorae), Sea Snails (Nerita spp.), and the clam or “almeja” (Mercenaria 

mercenaria). Recent studies have tentatively identified two to four amphidromous shrimp species 

and two to five freshwater fish in the streams. Further studies will be required to confirm the species 

and their year-round presence in Vieques. 

Invertebrates 

Land invertebrates make up the largest group of terrestrial fauna in the Vieques Refuge. At this time, 

an inventory and a description of these species has not been fully compiled. Aside from the different 

species of water and land crabs, which are listed above as aquatic organisms, there are several 

arthropods, gastropods, one or two Onychophora, and some annelids that can be found throughout 

various habitats within and around the refuge. 

Some of these are arachnids, such as the greater Puerto Rican Tarantula (Cyrtopholis portoricae), 

Banana Spiders (Argiope spp.), hexagonal shaped spiders (Gasteracantha spp.), and a few different 

species of scorpions probably from the genera Centruroides and Tytius. The diploda are represented 

by two known genera of millipedes on the refuge, Rhinocricus and Orthocricus, while the chilopoda 

are represented by different species of centipedes perhaps including the genus Scolopendra. The 

Class Insecta is well represented by a large variety of butterflies, moths, bees, wasps, ants, 

dragonflies, beetles, weevils, grasshoppers, walking sticks, termites, etc. There are at least two 

species of annelids (earthworms) along with perhaps two species of Peripatus (velvet worms) that 

have been collected in and around the refuge (Segui, University of Puerto Rico, personal 

communication 2005), and there are several species of gastropods (snails) in these habitats. This 

last group includes the Pseudopineria viequensis, a land snail that was first discovered and described 

on the island of Vieques (Ortiz, University of Puerto Rico, personal communication 2005). 

FLORA 

Information on the flora of Vieques was collected as early as 1694 (Proctor 1994). The first collector 

was Jean-Baptiste Labat, a French friar who visited Vieques between 1694 and 1705. Several other 

botanical collectors visited the island between this time and Shafer’s (1914) and Wilson’s (1917) 

reports on the vegetation of Vieques Island. Some botanists only compiled lists and others actually 

documented reports with herbarium collections. Other sources of information include the Flora of 

Puerto Rico (Britton and Wilson 1924-1930); Proctor’s (1994) checklist for Vieques; the grasses listed 

in Hitchcock (1936); trees in Little and Wadsworth (1964) and Little, Woodbury and Wadsworth 

(1974); orchids in Ackerman (1996); and vines and lianas in Acevedo (2003). Woodbury and 

Woodbury and Martorell collected extensively during the 1960s and specimens are located in New 

York and Puerto Rico. More recently Breckon (2004) compiled, based on literature citations and a 

limited herbarium survey plus collections made by Pedro Juan Rivero (2002) and by Breckon, a 

working checklist of 830 species for Vieques. 

During the 19th century much of the island of Vieques was cleared of its dense forests for the planting 

of sugarcane. As early as 1851, it was necessary to import lumber for construction. This makes the 

vegetation on Vieques profoundly disturbed by human habitation and the dense forest that once 

covered the island has been replaced by secondary woodlands. The woodland areas and remnant 

forests found on the slopes of Monte Pirata will never have the same species composition or diversity 

of the original forests of Vieques but none the less provide habitat for the island’s fauna. 
38 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

A large number of the species are introductions and many are widespread weeds associated with 

human activities. Of the 830 plants included in the checklist, 165 or about 20 percent are introduced 

or exotic. Relatively few rare plants, however, have been observed to be present. Twenty-seven rare 

species of plants have been recorded of which five are federally listed as either threatened or 

endangered (Table 2). Three of the latter are known to occur on refuge lands. No plant species have 

been reported to be endemic to Vieques, however, several species reported from Vieques are known 

to be endemic to Puerto Rico. 

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES 

The geologic history of Puerto Rico helps explain the variety and distribution of its vegetation. Puerto 

Rico sits at the eastern end of a massive oceanic volcanic mountain chain. During past glacial 

periods the climate is believed to have been drier and cooler. Sea levels fluctuated drastically 

dropping as much as 100 meters during maximum glaciations. The Virgin Islands (except for the 

island of St. Croix), Culebra, and Vieques were connected with Puerto Rico as recently as during the 

maximum ice advance approximately 11,000 years ago. This land mass formed the Puerto Rican 

bank, which encompassed an area twice the present size of Puerto Rico. This complex history has 

led to the presence of many different vegetation types. Conserving biological diversity at the level of 

natural communities complements the single-species conservation approach because natural 

communities contain important assemblages of species and the habitats that support them. 

Vieques Island is located 9.65 kilometers southeast of the nearest point on the main island of Puerto 

Rico. The island is approximately 22 miles long and 4.55 miles wide at its widest point. It totals 

51.35 square miles or approximately 32,864 acres. The deepest water separating the islands 

reaches only 18 meters. Vieques does not have any endemic plant species. It has a recorded flora 

of 781 species representing 109 families. Of this total, 660 species are believed to be native, while 

121 have been introduced from elsewhere. There are nine plant species on Vieques that do not 

appear elsewhere on Puerto Rico. 

In 1742, it was reported that Vieques was covered with lush vegetation. By 1812, valuable timber 

species were being exported from Vieques and used to build houses, boats, and sugar presses. The 

following species were listed as exports in 1812: Palo Blanco, Caoba, Tachuelo, Capa, Pimienta, 

Guyacan, Malagueta, Mora, Ucar, Tortugo, and Huco. By 1851 it was reported that Vieques had 

begun importing timber as local supplies had become exhausted. 

The island in general underwent profound disturbance during the sugarcane era when its cultivation 

dominated the economy. As the forest was cut, sugarcane, plantain, cotton, and tobacco plantations 

slowly covered much of the island. Sugarcane reached its peak in 1922 when there were four 

processing mills on the island. Aerial photographs show the majority of the west end of the island 

under cultivation except for the highest peaks and ridges. The drier eastern part of the island was 

used extensively for grazing livestock. By 1950, most all of the Navy lands were used for grazing 

livestock rather than sugarcane. After the demise of sugarcane, unmanaged pastures readily 

reverted to dense thorn thickets and secondary growth forest. This vegetation in general is more 

characteristic of the dry coastal vegetation zone. 

According to the ecological life zone system, six life zones are found in Puerto Rico and the Virgin 

Islands. These are: subtropical dry forest, subtropical moist forest, subtropical wet forest, subtropical 

rain forest, subtropical lower montane forest, and lower montane rain forest. The subtropical moist 

forest is the dominant life zone covering more than 58 percent of the area. According to this life zone 

perspective, approximately two-thirds of Vieques is covered with subtropical dry forest and about onethird is covered with subtropical moist forest. On Vieques these two ecological life zones can be further 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 39

divided into various different vegetation cover types. The flora of Vieques has undergone extensive 

disturbance and remains in various stages of succession and is not in equilibrium. The grassland cover 

is not an original vegetation type but rather the result of disturbance by which it is maintained. There 

are similar communities of plants occurring within the different vegetation types. The plant community 

is more or less a cohesive group of species, mutually interacting and characterized by its floristic 

composition and structure. To facilitate discussion and for purposes of mapping, seven vegetation 

cover types will be identified. This system is intended to conform to the International Classification of 

Ecological Communities System and has been selected by the United States Federal Geographic Data 

Committee as the standard for describing vegetation communities throughout the Americas. The 

International Classification System describes vegetation types in several hierarchical levels including 

vegetation structure and composition. These are: beach, coastal strand forest, mangrove, seagrass 

beds, dry forest and shrub, mixed evergreen-deciduous forest, and grassland. 

Table 2. Vieques rare plant species 

VIEQUES RARE PLANT SPECIES 

Amphitecna latifolia (Miller) A.Gentry 

Baccharis dioica Vahl. 

Calyptranthes thomasiana Berg.* 

Celtis trinervia Lam. 

Chamaecrista glandulosa (L.) Greene var. mirabilis * 

Chamaesyce ophthalmica (Pers.) Burch 

Cordia rupicola Urb. 

Erythrina eggersii Krukoff & Moldenke 

Eugenia cordata (Sw.) DC. var. sintenisii (Kiaersk.) Krug & Urb. 

Eugenia sessiliflora Vahl 

Goetzea elegans Wydler* 

Ipomoea eggersii (House) D.F.Austin 

Malpighia woodburyana Vivaldi 

Morisonia americana L. 

Myrciaria floribunda (West ex Willd.) Berg 

Myrciaria myrtifolia Alain 

Peperomia myrtifolia (Vahl) A.Dietr. 

Pilea sanctae-crucis Liebm. 

Prockia crucis L. 

Psidium longipes (Berg) McVaugh var. orbiculare (Berg) McVaugh 

Psychilis macconnelliae Sauleda 

Sabal causiarum (O.F.Cook) Becc 

Schoepfia schreberi Gmel. 

Sesuvium microphyllum Willd. 
40 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

VIEQUES RARE PLANT SPECIES 

Stahlia monosperma (Tul.) Urb.* 

Tetrapterys inaequalis Cav. 

Tolumnia prionochila (Kränzlin) Braem

(*federally listed as either threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act) 

Beach 

Beach community vegetation occupies the upper open sandy beaches, rocky shorelines, and 

adjacent sea salt spray zones encompassing the island. This vegetation extends into some low-lying 

areas above the beach and is under the influence of saltwater, salt spray, and sea winds. Most of the 

species in this zone are pan-tropical and indigenous or secondarily distributed, such as Ipomoea pescaprae and Cocos nucifera. Extending towards the shore one finds the pioneering runners of 

Sporobolus virginicus, Paspalum vaginatum and Spartina patens, along with the two very common 

vines, Ipomoea pes-caprae and Canavalia maritima. On the less often disturbed upper beach, these 

three grasses and two vines occur along with other succulents, including the annual crucifer, Cakile 

lanceolata, and the Euphorb, Chamaesyce buxifolia, where they form dense mats. Further 

development in this area will exhibit Scaevola plumieri, Suriana maritima, and Borrichia aborescens

and then the eventual invasion by sea grape (Coccoloba uvifera). Along the upper reaches of some 

stretches of beach a highly variable wind driven sand dune system may develop. 

Although the sandy beaches are usually sterile in the intertidal zone, the rocky shores where the surf 

reaches are often covered with the algas Turinaria turbinata and Enteromorpha sp. Where sand has 

accumulated within the rocks, Euphorbia buxifolia, Suriana martima, and Borrichia arborescens are 

found. Dense mats of Fimbristylis spadicea and Spartina patens are common in the deeper open 

sands where dense stands of buttonwood mangrove, Conocarpus erectus, are absent. Above this 

disturbed area on pitted limestone slabs, spiny succulent vegetation occurs with: Melocactus intortus, 

Opuntia rubescens, Cephalocereus royenii, Lemaireocereus hystrix, and Amaranthus spinosus. This 

desert like vegetation gives way to various xerophytic shrubs, especially Coccoloba uvifera. 

Coastal Strand Forest 

This forest type is restricted to the narrow coastal areas behind the beaches and mangrove forests. 

In the protected lee of the occasional sand dunes a taller structurally complex and floristically rich 

xerophytic scrub develops. This is Beard’s (1944) ‘littoral woodland.” This snakebark (Colubrina 

arborescens) shrubland alliance is diverse with many species of lianas, the shrubs Erithalis fruticosa, 

Suriana maritima, and Oplonia spinosa and occasionally dense stands of Bromelia pinguin. The 

vegetation diversity of coastal strand forest is high and is composed of other characteristic species 

such as: Coccoloba diversifolia, Coccoloba uvifera, Cassine xylocarpa, Byrsonima lucida, Bucida 

buceras, Bursera simaruba, Tabebuia heterophylla and several Eugenia spp. 

Mangrove 

Mangroves may be Puerto Rico’s most endangered ecosystem and worldwide are disappearing at 

rates comparable to those of tropical wet forest (1.5 percent/year). Mangrove stands host 

exceptionally diverse communities of benthic invertebrates and dense assemblages of resident and 

migratory birds. Mangrove forests are located along the northern and southern coasts of Vieques. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 41

There are 36 major mangrove sites on the island totaling approximately 900 acres. Twenty of the 

mangrove sites are classified as closed lagoon forests, seven are classified as ephemeral, six as 

fringe, two as open, and one as a dwarf forest. 

In general, hydrologic pattern determines mangrove community structure and function. Restoring 

tidal fluctuations and flushing to impounded areas will improve the health of many of these stressed 

areas. Livestock grazing and excess sedimentation due to upland erosion are still major problems 

that need to be addressed. The largest mangrove communities are located along the south-central 

coast. Ensenada Honda is the largest at approximately 200 acres, followed by Puerto Ferro with 93 

acres, and Puerto Mosquito with 60 acres. Laguna Kiani on the west end of the island encompasses 

approximately 96 acres. 

Stands of red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) typically line the shorelines of the bays, lagoons, and 

channels. Red mangrove prop roots decrease shoreline erosion and provide shelter for numerous 

marine fauna. Moving inland, one finds black mangrove (Avicennia germinans), followed by white 

mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa) on slightly higher ground. Buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus) 

occurs. Sandy salt flats often extend behind the tidal mangrove areas and often with the following 

herbaceous associates: Batis maritima, Sesuvium portulacastrum, Heliotropium curassavicum, Lantana 

involucrata, Ipomoea pes-caprae, Sporobolus virginicus, and other grasses and sedges. Common 

woody vegetation includes the natives: Randia aculeata, Pictetia aculeata, Cocccoloba uvifera, Bucida 

buceras, and Tabebuia heterophylla. The Old World (Thespesia populnea) forest alliance is often 

associated with mangroves adjoining them on the inland side though generally not tidally flooded. 

Botanical studies on Vieques have occurred as far back as 1705. However, a detailed inventory of 

the mangrove wetlands and ecology was not done until the late 1970s (Lewis, Roy R. 1979 Mangrove 

Forests of Vieques) as part of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Use of the 

Atlantic Fleet Weapons Training Facility Inner Range (Vieques). 

At the time of the environmental impact statement, it was estimated that between 1936 and 1978 

about 329 acres of mangroves were eliminated. This includes the loss of wetlands in the Laguna 

Kiani and Playa Grande areas, which showed a loss of about 264 acres of forested wetlands and an 

increase in mud flats. The major cause of mortality in these areas was attributed to restriction of tidal 

flow or alteration of freshwater drainage into the wetlands. At that time, it was reported that Laguna 

Boca Quebrada had the highest mortality of mangroves due to restricted tidal exchange.Lewis (Lewis 

et al. 1981) determined that there were 36 individual mangrove forests covering a total of 904 acres 

(366 hectares) in 1981. This represented an 18 percent decline from the historical forest coverage 

(1936) of 1,102 acres (446 hectares). The major problems affecting mangrove forests at that time 

were 1) cattle grazing; 2) excess erosion/sedimentation due to poor land management practices, 

including overgrazing by both horses and cattle; 3) blockage of natural tidal channels by construction; 

4) filling of tidal channels by sand due to areas being destabilized by military practices; 5) natural 

drought; and 6) bomb damage in the Live Impact Area. 

Lewis made several recommendations regarding the enhancement and restoration of several 

lagoons. These recommendations included re-routing of roads, installation of bridges, improving 

culverts, and reduction and control of livestock grazing. 
42 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Lewis returned in 1985 to do a follow up study of the mangroves on Vieques (Lewis 1985, Status of 

Mangrove Forests on Vieques, Puerto Rico). Attention was given to engineering activities taken by 

the Navy to improve the existing conditions in the mangroves. Based on the information gathered 

during this status survey, the following results were indicated: 

1) Since 1978, eleven of the forests have shown improvement; 

2) Since 1978, three forests have shown decline; and 

3) Since 1978, twenty-two of the mangrove forests have shown little change. 

The successful exclusion of grazing animals was one of the factors for wetland improvement. 

However, grazing and excess sedimentation from upland erosion continue to be problematic in 

eastern Vieques. 

By 1985, a bridge had been placed over the opening of the lagoon at Bahía Chiva and Kiani Lagoon. 

However, other lagoons like Laguna Puerto Diablo still remain blocked by a roadway and attempts at 

restoring the hydrological connection at Laguna Boca Quebrada have not been successful. 

In 1996, the Land Use Management Plan for U.S. Naval Facilities at Vieques, Puerto Rico, was written 

by GeoMarine. This was the third Land Use Management Plan for the area, but unlike the previous 

two, it provided specific management recommendations over a 1- to 20-year period. All of these plans 

were written as a result of the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding between the Navy and the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The 1996 Land Use Management Plan called for the removal of freeranging livestock that continued to impact native vegetation, removal of roads that were impacting 

mangroves, and improving hydrology to the various coastal lagoons. According to the land use plan, 

livestock overgrazing, erosion from road construction and maintenance, and blockage of hydrology 

continued to be the main threats to mangroves on Vieques. Lagoons with restricted flow continued to 

be Laguna Boca Quebrada, Laguna Bahia Chiva, and Laguna Puerto Diablo. 

The removal of a rock groin at the mouth of Laguna Boca Quebrada was recommended for 

immediate action since the structure was trapping sand and making the situation at the lagoon worse. 

The re-routing of the roads at Laguna Puerto Diablo and Laguna Monte Largo and the restoration of 

hydrological connection to the sea was recommended as short-term action items. 

Erosion and sedimentation of mangrove wetlands due to runoff from the adjacent and sometimes 

surrounding dirt roads have consistently been cited as an impact to these ecologically sensitive 

areas. This has lead to changes in microtopography that result in vegetation shifts from wetland to 

upland vegetation and loss of habitat. 

Sea Grass Beds 

This permanently flooded subtropical hydromorphic rooted vegetation occurs in shallow waters on muddy 

or sandy substrate. The northwest coast seagrass bed covers approximately 5,000 acres and is the 

largest seagrass bed in Puerto Rico. This important conservation zone is habitat for the threatened green 

sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), the Antillean manatee (Trichechus m. manatus), the brown pelican 

(Pelecanus occidentalis occidentalis), and the queen conch (Strombus gigas), as well as other species of 

commercial and recreational value for the local community. This broad shallow shelf contains dense and 

continuous sea grass beds comprising a mix of turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum), manatee grass 

(Syringodium filiforme), and shoal grass (Halodule wrightii). This area is within the territorial waters under 

the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Under the provisions of PL 106-398, the Puerto 

Rico DNER, the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, and the Service entered into an agreement and 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 43

developed a Cooperative Management Plan that identifies general management needs for the area. 

Further development of the management strategies for the sea grass beds will be a cooperative effort by 

the three agencies. While the primary management jurisdiction for the sea grass beds is with the 

Commonwealth DNER, the Service will work cooperatively with both the DNER and PR Conservation 

Trust to ensure wise management of this valuable resource. Where appropriate, any management 

programs developed in fulfillment of the referenced agreement will be incorporated into the step-down 

plans for the Vieques NWR. Although this CCP will not include specific goals, objectives, or strategies for 

the sea grass beds, the Service recognizes the importance of this resource as a component of the 

Vieques interconnected ecosystems. 

Dry Forest and Shrub 

Subtropical dry forest was the original dominant forest cover on Vieques. This original vegetative 

cover has been greatly modified and today is best characterized as dense, dry, spiny woodland and 

shrub. This is for the most part a secondary succession developing after the original forest was 

cleared for agriculture. Vegetation is generally short and spiny with a high stem density. Dominant 

species are several Acacia spp., Prosopis juliflora, Leucaena leucocephala, Ziziphus mauritiana, 

Pithecellobium unguis-cati, various Croton and Lantana species, Randia aculeata, and Bucida 

buceras, among others. This exotic and altered vegetation is often called mesquite savanna and 

involves the Prosopis/Bucida woodland alliance with Panicum maximum or Chloris barbataDichanthium annulatum dominating the herbaceous layer. The latter often includes the woody 

species Achyranthes aspera, Parkinsonia aculeata, and Capparis flexuosa. Other areas may be 

classified as lowland drought-deciduous shrubland consisting of the Acacia macracantha-Acacia 

farnesiana shrubland alliance and the Leucaena leucocephala shrubland alliance. 

This vegetation is widely scattered and consists of a mixture of native and introduced species. The 

introduced species were the primary colonizers of the abandoned agricultural areas and serve as nurse 

trees creating microenvironments suitable for the return of the native dry forest component. The seed 

source for these areas comes from the valuable stands of remnant, mostly native dry forest that is best 

represented on the limestone bedrock in the Puerto Mosquito, Puerto Ferro, and Bahia Corcho areas. 

Common species include: Coccoloba spp, Pisonia subcordata, Krugiodendron ferreum, Crossopetalum 

rhacoma, Bourreria succulenta, Gymnanthes lucida, Rauvolfia nitida, and Bursera simaruba. Other 

remnant stands with high native species composition occur on the hilltops and ridges where Thrinax 

morrisii is dominant. The hills on the west end are gentler and more rolling with deeper corresponding 

soils. The east end landscape is more rugged with more exposed rock surfaces. 

Mixed Evergreen-Deciduous Forest 

This forest vegetation is mostly mesophytic occurring in moderately wet and humid areas. Mature 

remnants of this mesic forest grow on the upper southwest slopes and ridges of Monte Pirata, Cerro 

El Buey, and on the hillside above and down within Quebrada Marunguey. This is the most 

diversified and undisturbed association and has the greatest number of species present. Two of the 

most conspicuous upper-story species are the slender fan palm (Coccothrinax alta), which is endemic 

to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, and the almacigo (Bursera simaruba). This area contains many 

of the rare and other endemic species found on the island such as: Eugenia woodburyana and

Goetzea elegans -- two endemic, federally listed endangered species, as well as Myrciaria myrtifolia, 

Malpighia fucata, Cordia rickseckeri and Acalypha berteroana. Other common species within the 

forest are: Savia sessiliflora, Krugiodendron ferreum, Chrysophyllum argenteum, and Ceiba 

pentandra. The roadside vegetation leading up to Monte Pirata is quite disturbed and supports 

various weedy species, such as Leucaena leucocephala, Cordia polycephala, and Mimosa ceratonia. 
44 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Grassland 

Historically, these communities of perennial graminoid vegetation were maintained in pasture through 

grazing and fire. Much of this area is now in the process of returning to woody vegetation. Weedy 

herbaceous and shrub species begin the process and are followed by several early successional tree 

species such as Leucaena leucocephala and Albizia lebbeck. These unmanaged grassland areas islandwide are readily reverting to dry forest and shrub, except in those areas recently subjected to fire or 

maintained by mowing, such as the areas around Camp Garcia. These areas are dominated by short 

bunch grasses and several alliances occur including: the Dichanthium annulatum herbaceous alliance 

and the Cenchrus ciliaris herbaceous alliance. Several other mixed grass stands are common including: 

Bothriochloa pertusa, Eleusine indica, and Sporobulus indicus. The African guinea grass (Panicum 

maximum) herbaceous vegetation is also very common and is considered a tall grassland type. These 

grass complexes are dis-climax and will revert to woody vegetation in the absence of disturbance. The 

overgrazing of grassland areas will also move an area towards thorn shrub consisting of dense stands of 

Acacia spp., Ziziphus mauritiana, and Prosopis juliflora. A grassland management plan needs to be 

initiated to maintain selected representative grassland habitat. 

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES (FEDERALLY LISTED) 

The Vieques National Wildlife Refuge supports important habitats for native, migratory, rare, and 

protected species. Approximately eighteen (18) federally listed plants and animal species have been 

reported from or expected to occur on the Vieques Refuge and surrounding waters. These species 

include four (4) species of plants; four (4) species of reptiles, including sea turtles; three (3) species of 

birds; and three (3) species of mammals, including the Antillean manatee (Figures 13 and 14). 

No designated critical habitat is found on Vieques Refuge. 

Listed Plants 

Four species of federally listed plants occur in the Vieques Refuge: Cóbana negra (Stahlia 

monosperma), Calyptranthes thomasiana, Chamaecrista glandulosa var. mirabilis, and Matabuey 

(Goetzea elegans). All four of these species have been documented within the Vieques Refuge, the 

Matabuey only recently. 

Cóbana negra (Stahlia monosperma) is a medium-sized, evergreen tree that reaches 25 to 50 feet in 

height, and 1 to 1.5 feet in diameter. Flowers are yellow and are produced between March and May, 

depending on rainfall. Scattered populations survive in Puerto Rico, Vieques, and the eastern portion 

of the Dominican Republic (FWS 1996). This species grows in brackish, seasonally flooded wetlands 

in association with mangrove communities and in upland areas. Cultivated plants have been 

reported from inland areas as well. On the Vieques Refuge, the species is located in the Laguna 

Kiani and Laguna Yanuel areas. Approximately 8 individuals of Cóbana negra were observed by 

Santiago-Valentín and Rojas-Vázquez in Laguna Yanuel during their studies in 1995 (SantiagoValentín, Rojas-Vázquez 2001). 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 45

Figure 13. Threatened and endangered species (west) 

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

Monte Pirata

Cerro El Buey

0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles

0 0.5 1

Playa 

μ

0.25 Kilometers

Punta Arenas

(Green Beach)

301 m

987 ft

Punta Vaca

ROTHR

Site

Punta Arenas

Punta Boca 

Quebrada

Playa 

Grande

Laguna

Kiani

Laguna

Punta Arenas Laguna El Pobre

Laguna

Boca Quebrada

Laguna

Playa Grande

Playita

Playa Vieja

[

[

[

[

[

[

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustROTHRLagoons

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryIntermitent Streams

Manatees

Sea Turtles

[ Leatherback[ Hawksbill[ Green

[

Stahlia monosperma

Calyptranthes thomasian

Brown Pelican
46 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 14. Threatened and endangered species (east) 

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[[

[

[

[[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

μ012 0.5 Kilometers 012 0.5 Miles

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustLagoonsIntermitent Stream

Sea Turtles

[ Leatherback[ Hawksbill[ Green

Manatees

Puerto 

Ferro

Playa Caracas

(Red Beach)

Playa La Chiva

(Blue Beach)

Isla Chiva

Berdiales

Bahía 

Tapón

Camp García

Punta Conejo

Cayo Yanuel

Ensenada Honda

Bahía Fanduca

Jalovita

Playa Matías

(Yellow Beach) Cayo Conejo Roca Alcatraz

Bahia Salina 

del Sur

Tamarindo

Sur

Punta

Este

Playa Blanca

Punta

Salinas

Playa Brava

Isla

Yallis

Bahia 

Icacos

Puerto 

Diablo

Punta 

Brigadier Punta 

Goleta Puerto Negro

Punta 

Campanilla

Playa de Barco Playa Fosil

Playa

Yallis

Playa

Santa Maria

Jalova

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

Stahlia monosperma

Brown Pelican
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 47

Calyptranthes thomasiana is a shrub or small tree that may reach 30 feet in height and 5 inches in 

diameter. It is only known from three locations: Monte Pirata in Vieques; Bordeaux Mountain in St. 

John; and Gorda Peak in Virgin Gorda. Approximately 10 to 12 individuals are known to occur on 

Vieques near the summit of Monte Pirata. In Monte Pirata, Calyptranthes thomasiana is found in the 

moist deciduous formation of the inner hills and slopes, a forest type that also includes semievergreen forests (FWS 1997). 

Chamaecrista glandulosa var. mirabilis is a shrub which may reach up to 3 feet in height. This 

species is known from only scattered locations along the southern shore of Tortuguero Lagoon and 

one area in Dorado (Fish and Wildlife Service 1994). The species utilizes silica sands associated to 

limestone formations. A historical record indicated that the species had been collected near Red 

Beach or Bahía Corcho in Vieques. Surveys were conducted in 1996 and 2000 and no individuals 

were found (Geomarine 2003). 

Goetzea elegans (Matabuey) is a shrub or small tree reaching 30 feet in height with a stem diameter of 

5 inches. The species generally flowers and sets fruit between April and August and the funnel-shaped 

flowers are yellow-orange in color. The fruit is an orange one-seeded berry that is reputed to be 

poisonous (Fish and Wildlife Service 1987). The species habitat consists of semi evergreen forests of 

the subtropical moist forest zone (Ewel and Whitmore 1973), and in mainland Puerto Rico the species 

has been found only below 660 feet (200 meters) elevation in the foothills and mogotes (karst limestone 

hills) of northern Puerto Rico (FWS 1987). In 2000, the species was found in four locations along 

forested drainages in western Vieques. Approximately 200 individuals, from seedlings to adults, have 

been documented (Geomarine 2003, personal communication Marcos Caraballo 2005). 

Listed Reptiles 

Sea Turtles 

Of the six sea turtle species that are found in waters of the United States or that nest on beaches of 

the United States, only the leatherback sea turtle, hawksbill sea turtle, and green sea turtle nest 

regularly in Vieques. The loggerhead sea turtle occurs in waters near Vieques, but no nests have 

been documented in Vieques. 

Sea turtles are among the largest living reptiles. Except for the leatherback sea turtle, which is a 

pelagic species, most sea turtles live in warm tropical and subtropical waters. Sea turtles, during their 

nesting seasons, come ashore to lay their eggs. The Service jurisdiction on sea turtles only includes 

this land-base behavior. Sea turtles nest in different types of beaches, since habitat requirements 

vary among species. Reproductive biology is very similar for all sea turtle species. However, there 

are some differences in habitat use and nesting seasons. 

The leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) is the most migratory and wide-ranging sea turtle species. 

Nesting grounds are distributed world-wide. In the Caribbean, the species nest in French Guiana, 

Surinam, Guyana, Colombia, Venezuela, Panamá, and Costa Rica. In U.S. territories, the 

leatherback sea turtle nests in Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, and Florida (National Marine 

Fisheries Service and Fish and Wildlife Service 1992). The leatherback sea turtle requires sandy 

beaches backed with vegetation and sloped sufficiently so that the crawl to dry sand is not too far. 

The preferred beaches have proximity to deep water and generally rough or high energy seas. The 

species nest from February to August in Puerto Rico. Peak nesting season starts in April and may 

last until July. This varies among beaches and years. 
48 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Nesting by the hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) within the United States territory occurs 

in Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and very infrequently in Florida (National Marine Fisheries 

Service and Fish and Wildlife Service 1993). Nesting of hawksbill sea turtles occurs on almost any 

sand or mixed sand/gravel vegetated beach. They prefer shallow low-energy beaches and pocket 

beaches. Hawksbills may crawl up to 50-70 meters landward to nest under or near the vegetation. 

The hawksbill nests in low densities and nesting season varies with locality. In most locations, 

nesting occurs sometime between April and November. In Vieques, the peak season for hawksbills 

has been identified from June to December. 

Breeding populations of the green turtle in Florida and along the Pacific Coast of Mexico are listed as 

endangered; all other populations are listed as threatened. The green sea turtle is a circumglobal species 

in tropical and subtropical waters. Within the United States, green turtles nest in small numbers in the 

Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, and in larger numbers along the east coast of Florida (National Marine 

Fisheries Service and Fish and Wildlife Service 1991). The green sea turtle shares nesting habitat with 

leatherback and hawksbill sea turtles. In Vieques, the green sea turtle utilizes high-energy beaches. The 

nesting season varies with the locality but, in Vieques, it nests from June to October. 

Vieques Refuge supports important nesting beaches for all three species. Approximately 21 beaches 

of the refuge have been identified as sea turtle nesting beaches (Belardo et al. 1991, Belardo et al. 

1992, Belardo et al. 1993, Belardo et al. 1994, Belardo et al. 1995, Belardo et al 1996, Belardo et al. 

1997, Belardo et al. 1999, Belardo et al. 2000, and Belardo et al. 2001). 

Approximately 846 sea turtle nesting activities have been reported from these beaches in the last 

decade. High numbers of nesting activities have been recorded at Jalova, Matias (Yellow Beach), 

Brava, Fanduca, Jalovita, Tamarindo Sur, Playa de Barco, and Punta Arenas (Green Beach). 

Moderate numbers of nesting activities have been recorded at Playa Campaña (Purple Beach), la 

Chiva (Blue Beach), Playa Blanca, Boca Quebrada, and Caracas (Red Beach). Relatively low 

numbers of nesting records are available for the rest of the beaches. The beaches of Eastern 

Vieques produced approximately 92 percent of all nesting activities during the 10-year period. 

Nesting activity varies among years, sea turtle species, and beaches. Nesting activities per year 

ranged from a minimum of 28 nesting activities in 1995 to a maximum of 142 in 1994. Peak nesting 

activities have been documented every 3 to 4 years. 

The leatherback sea turtle is the species with greater number of nesting activities, with a total of 391 

nesting activities in 10 years, followed by the hawksbill sea turtle with 290 nesting activities in 10 

years, and the green sea turtle with 165 nesting activities from 1992 to 2000. 

The three species of sea turtles nesting in the Vieques Refuge utilize the beaches differently. 

Beaches such as Playa Jalova (Yellow Beach), Playa Brava, and Playa de Barco provide nesting 

habitat for all three species of sea turtles. 

The majority of the beaches are used by both leatherback and hawksbill sea turtles. The beaches of 

the eastern point of Eastern Vieques (Playa Blanca, Brava and Playa de Barco) are mainly used by 

green sea turtles. 

Virgin Islands Tree Boa and Culebra Giant Anole 

Although suitable habitat for the Virgin Islands Boa and Culebra Giant Anole has been identified on 

the refuge, the species have not been reported. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 49

Endangered Mammals 

Antillean Manatee 

The Antillean (West Indian) Manatee is found in the Caribbean region and the Gulf of Mexico (Fish 

and Wildlife Service 1986). Although manatees are generally restricted to large slow-moving rivers, 

river mouths, and shallow low-energy coastal areas, they can move as far as one or two miles from 

shore, particularly when traveling between areas. Based on aerial surveys of the entire coast of 

Puerto Rico, the Service estimates that no more than 200 manatees are found in the island (Fish and 

Wildlife Service 2001). The manatee is known to travel through, feed, and bottom rest in the coastal 

waters of Vieques. Manatees have been sighted primarily in coastal waters in the northwestern part 

of Vieques, but have been observed as far as Puerto Ferro, in the south-central coast of the island. 

Endangered Whales 

Five (5) species of whales have been reported traveling through the coastal waters of Vieques. 

However, the Service does not have any jurisdiction over these species nor does it propose any 

management of the species habitat. 

Federally Listed Birds 

Brown Pelican 

Traditional brown pelican (Pelecanus o. occidentalis) roosting sites occur on the coast of the refuge 

near Punta Vaca and Punta Boca Quebrada, within the Laguna Kiani, and east and west of the 

Mosquito Pier. The brown pelican feeds in areas such as the coves, inlets, and lagoons of Vieques. 

The most important nesting colony of pelican in Puerto Rico is located in Cayo Conejo, a small island 

off the southeastern coast of Vieques and administered by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 

Roseate Tern 

The Caribbean Roseate Tern (Sterna dougallii) is listed as threatened in the Caribbean. The species 

is distributed throughout the Caribbean, with the largest populations occurring in the Lesser Antilles 

(Fish and Wildlife Service 1993). The species utilizes different types of habitats for nesting, including 

small offshore islands, marine rocks, cays, islets, near vegetation or jagged limestone rock, open 

sandy beaches, and among coral rubble (FWS 1993). In Vieques, the species was reported nesting 

on the eastern tip of the island in 2001. 

Yellow-shouldered Blackbird 

Historic records of the Yellow-shouldered Blackbird from Vieques are available in literature (Fish and 

Wildlife Service 1978). However, no current sightings of the species in Vieques have been 

documented. 

Species of Special Concern 

The refuge ecosystems also support habitat for species of special concern (Table 3), which are 

considered rare, critical, or locally listed by the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources. Rare plant species were listed in Table 2. 
50 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Table 3. Commonwealth critical species 

Scientific Name Common Name Status Certainty of 

Occurrence 

ANIMALS

Oxyura jamaicensis Ruddy Duck V Known 

Patagioenas leucocephala White-crowned Pigeon V Known 

Dendrocygna arborea West Indian Whistling Duck V Known 

Fulica caribaea Caribbean Coot V Known 

Anas bahamensis White-cheeked Pintail V Known 

Key: V = Vulnerable, considered threatened by DNER 

NOXIOUS/INVASIVE SPECIES 

Flora 

The mountains of Puerto Rico rose above the sea in the late Eocene or early Oligocene 

approximately 40 million years ago, and since that time a flora of 3,126 species has developed. Birds 

or storm systems probably brought in most of the original species from other landmasses. Two 

hundred and forty endemic species evolved in Puerto Rico or remained here after extinctions 

elsewhere. Thus, endemic species account for about 9 percent of the flora, which is much lower than 

the other major Antillean islands, Cuba has about 49 percent endemism, Hispaniola about 36 

percent, and Jamaica almost 30 percent. Puerto Rico has no endemic plant genera. 

The flora of Vieques consists of 830 species in 109 families. Of this total, 165 have been introduced 

from elsewhere. Pre-Columbian people undoubtedly imported many of the fruit-bearing tree species. 

The expansion of the flora continued with the early European settlers and traders who brought in a 

number of useful species. Francis and Liogier (1982) estimated that 45 of these species were 

reproducing in the wild. In the last century, additional species were introduced for ornamental, 

forestry, coffee shade, and other purposes. About 35 species imported as ornamentals and about an 

equal number imported for forestry or agriculture have naturalized. The species naturalized in Puerto 

Rico have come from tropical and subtropical areas all over the world. It is estimated that 55 species 

originated in the new world (47 percent), 50 species are Asian, predominately India to Oceania (42 

percent) and 13 species or (11 percent) came from Africa and the Mediterranean. 

In Vieques, much of the original forest has long since been converted to agriculture and most 

subsequently, replaced by housing, pasture, and thorn scrub woodland. The two most severe 

ecological threats to the continuation of dry forests are wildfires and cattle grazing. Dry forest is easily 

cleared with fire and woody regeneration in fields and pastures easily suppressed with fire. The 

vegetation on the island evolved in the absence of large herbivores and is very susceptible to livestock 

grazing. The areas with the most extensive coverage of thorn scrub and other non-native vegetation 

are those that have been most heavily grazed, for example, within the Agricultural Out-Lease Area 

located in the eastern section of the refuge. In 1985, it was reported that 10,200 acres or 45 percent of 

Navy land were leased to the Cooperative de Ganaderos de Vieques. The Fish and Wildlife Service’s 

Field Station reported that “there was severe overgrazing of lease acreage and trespass in 

conservation zones.” In 1986, the commonwealth placed the Cooperative de Ganaderos in 

receivership. It was allowed to construct a 300-acre holding pen near the entrance to Camp Garcia and 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 51

began selling cattle. This holding pen has been subjected to the most recent overgrazing and supports 

extensive stands of thorn scrub. Cattle still roam the refuge on both ends of the island and continue to 

disturb the secondary growth forests, especially on the hillsides, drainages, and wetland areas. 

In general, the past ecological damage has been so complete in some cases that the refuge is now 

faced with the challenge and opportunity to assist in the design, creation, and direction of new 

habitats. Restoration ecology works best when it complements and reinforces the various ongoing 

natural processes. Recovery is a key component of restoration, the contribution of the system itself. 

Recovery involves allowing the system to express itself through natural succession and using the 

existing framework to move the composition to more native diversity. Conserving species diversity is 

essential. However, refuge management must try to understand and assess functional group 

diversity and strive to encourage more interactions. Habitats develop through a series of stages and 

many of the non-native species present in early stages will not persist. 

The following are several of the 165 introduced plant species occurring on Vieques: 

Zizyphus mauritiana-Indian Jujube, Aprin. An abandoned experimental commercial plantation with 

3x3 meter spacing on the south coast west of Esperanza has provided an ample source of seed that 

is readily dispersed by birds. This now naturalized species occurs across the island. 

Calotropis procera-Giant Indian Milkweed. Already widespread in 1912 when reported by Wetmore 

as Asclepias. This species is indicative of severe overgrazing which apparently had occurred by this 

time. This species continues its hold in poorly managed pasture. 

Acacia farnesiana-Aroma, Cassia. A thorny, weedy, aggressive species that has taken over large 

areas of previously overgrazed pasture. It forms dense impenetrable thickets often in association 

with several other species of Acacia. 

Prosopis juliflora-Bayahonda, Mesquite. This species arrived more than 200 years ago and has 

established itself widely in abandoned pasture throughout disturbed, dry areas island-wide. Although 

it can grow in diameter a centimeter per year for 100 years, its propagation is almost completely 

dependent on livestock. 

Jasminum fluminense-Brazilian jasmine. This evergreen, climbing, woody vine produces small black 

berries relished by many birds. Its vigorous growth and rapid spread at Cabo Rojo National Wildlife 

Refuge has caused problems for planted and wild native tree saplings. 

Casuarina equisetifolia-Australian pine, Casuarina. Large evergreen tree that has invaded extensive 

areas of south Florida. Although present in Puerto Rico and on Vieques, it has not as yet spread 

widely. Propagation of this species should not be encouraged. 

Thespesia populnea-Seaside mahoe, Emajagua, Emajaguilla. Evergreen shrubby tree with 

spreading lower branches making almost impenetrable thickets; its large fruit crop increases its dense 

growth. Originating in India, it is a common plant of coastal strands across Old and New World 

tropics. It is now a common constituent of mangrove communities and low-wave action beaches. Its 

fruits and seeds are buoyant and adapted to long-distance dispersal by ocean currents. It has taken 

over beaches used by nesting sea turtles on St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands. 
52 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Fauna 

Puerto Rico’s fauna, as well as flora, has been augmented by introductions both deliberate and 

accidental across all taxonomic classes. The entire native mammalian land fauna in Puerto Rico has 

been extirpated. The ground sloths, hutia, shrews, and spiny rats are long gone. The only remaining 

native mammals in Puerto Rico are the bats with sixteen named species. Three are extinct and 

among the thirteen living species are one endemic species and six endemic subspecies. Seven bat 

species are presumed to be present on Vieques. 

The introduced mammalian fauna begins with the Old World roof rat (Rattus rattus), which is 

widespread on Puerto Rico and all offshore islands, the brown rat (Rattus norvegicus), which is 

present but less widespread than R. rattus and apparently not present on Mona, and the house 

mouse (Mus musculus), which is ubiquitous and permanently stationed around the world. The small 

Indian mongoose (Herpestes auropunctatus) was introduced into Puerto Rico around 1877 from 

Jamaica and has become abundant across the island, as well as on Vieques. Its potential impact on 

small mammals is reflected in the difference in density of rats. The terrestrial brown rat is less 

abundant in areas of high mongoose densities, but the arboreal black rat numbers remain high in the 

presence of mongoose. Various other introduced mammals are found on the island, including dogs, 

cats, horses, and cattle. These feral animals cause considerable harm by preying on native species, 

destroying nests, and trampling mangroves and other vegetation. Mongoose, as well as dogs and 

cats, are known to prey on sea turtle hatchlings, ground nesting birds, and reptiles. Other introduced 

mammals include the agouti (Dasyprocta sp.), which was reportedly introduced by Amerindians to 

Vieques but is now presumed extinct. 

Puerto Rico harbors approximately 76 exotic avian species, one of the highest per unit area of 

anywhere in the world. Over 20 percent of the Puerto Rico avifauna is comprised of exotic finches, 

representing 82 percent of Puerto Rico’s granivorous birds. Many of these introductions have been 

accidental and related to the hugely popular pet trade in birds. 

The Pin-tailed Whydah (Vidua macroura) has established on the main island since two of its native 

African hosts, the Orange-cheeked Waxbill (Estrilda sp.) and Red-eared Waxbill (Estrilda troglodytes) 

have established. The Whydah has been observed parasitizing the introduced Indian Silverbill 

(Lonchura malabarica) and the Strawberry Finch (Amandava amandava) but is not yet known to 

parasitize any native species. The Whydah was observed nesting in a Corozo palm at the Vieques 

airport in 2001. 

The Bronze Mannikin was introduced to Puerto Rico in early 1800s from Africa and apparently spread 

to Vieques. It was locally common in a few pastures on the west end around the Navy barracks 

according to Sorrie in the 1970s and is fairly common today. 

Vieques serves as an important stepping-stone for birds that winter in the Lesser Antilles, as well as 

facilitating range expansions. The glossy cowbird (Molothrus bonariensis) was first reported in 1858 

in Vieques but did not show up in large numbers until the 1960s. It apparently moved up through the 

Lesser Antilles to Vieques and Puerto Rico. 

Failed introductions can also be instructive. A total of 40 Blue-hooded Euphonia (Euphonia musica) 

were introduced in Vieques in 1910 but disappeared by 1912. In 1971, the Department of Agriculture’s 

Division of Fish and Wildlife introduced 400 bobwhite quail though survival was short-lived. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 53

The herpetofauna of the Antilles is practically entirely an old Central America fauna extinct or nearly 

so in Central America. This generally applies to our endemic avifauna as well. Approximately 10 

percent of the herpetofauna of Puerto Rico is considered non-native. Fourteen reptile and five 

amphibian species have been reported from Vieques, including the giant Cane Toad (Bufo marinus) 

introduced in the 1920s to control June beetle larvae in sugarcane fields. The Green Iguana (Iguana 

iguana) has recently become established on Vieques and young Ball Pythons (Python regius) have 

also been seen on the refuge. At this time, it is not known if the pythons are reproducing in the wild. 

SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 

CULTURAL HISTORY 

The first permanent inhabitants of Vieques are considered to be the Archaic who lived there from 

1680 to 1500 B.C. This culture was followed by others known as the Saladoid, Huecoid, Ostionoid, 

and Taino cultures (Figures 15 and 16). At the time of the arrival of Christopher Columbus in 1493, 

the Taino population of Puerto Rico was estimated to be about 60,000. Within a very short period, 

the Taino people were subjugated by the Spanish and their population was decimated by disease, 

emigration, in combat with Spanish troops, and assimilation into the population. Since the first 

Spanish settlers did not bring women, it was common practice to take Taino wives. In 1511, several 

of the Taino chiefdoms in Puerto Rico, allied with the Caribs, and tried to defeat the Spaniards. This 

uprising was defeated by troops under the control of Governor Juan Ponce de León. 

In 1514, Cacimar, the Indian chief of Bieque, (Indian name for small land) actively participated in the 

attacks against the Spaniards. His brother, Yaureibo, led the last combat in Vieques in which the 

Spaniards brutally killed many Tainos and burned their huts and plantations. 

Although the Spaniards considered Vieques an important part of their colonization project, they did 

not inhabit the island immediately. The English, Dutch, and French settled on the island at various 

times during the 17th and 18th centuries, but they were all eventually evicted. 

In 1811, the Governor of Puerto Rico sent Juan Roselló to colonize the island. Although he was not 

fully successful, he was followed by Teófilo J.J. M. Le Guillou, of French descent. In 1828, Le Guillou 

asked the Governor of Puerto Rico to let him be in charge of Vieques’ lands, thus becoming the first 

Governor of Vieques. He led the Vieques’ colonization until his death in 1843. During his governing 

period, the first sugar plantations were established. The sugar industry and plantation system 

resulted in significant increases in the slave trade and the use of slaves in Vieques during the period 

up to the abolition of slavery in Puerto Rico. Slavery was officially abolished in Puerto Rico in 1873. 

During the late1800s, the sugar industry in Vieques was expanding with as many as five mills 

processing sugar in the early years of the Twentieth Century. 

Between the early 1900s and the expropriations by the Navy, sugar production was a major but 

declining agricultural activity in Vieques. The sugar plantation economy that developed during the 

19th century brought about a concentration of lands under the control of relatively few owners. This 

was the case in Vieques, as well as other cane growing areas. Associated with the large land 

holdings was the practice of permitting workers to live, build homes, and tend gardens and livestock 

on parcels within the larger estates. These workers, or “agregados,” did not have title to the lands 

they lived on, but were generally permitted to remain and provided a labor force for the landowners 

on a seasonal basis. 
54 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 15. Cultural resources (west) 

[

Monte Pirata

Cerro El Buey

Playa 

Punta Arenas

(Green Beach)

μ

301 m

987 ft

Punta Vaca

ROTHR

Site

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustROTHRLagoons

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge Boundary10 meter contourIntermitent Streams

[ Historic and/or Archaeological Site

Punta Arenas

Punta Boca 

Quebrada

Playa 

Grande

Laguna

Boca Quebrada

Laguna

Playa Grande

Laguna

Kiani

Laguna

Punta Arenas Laguna El Pobre

0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles

0 0.5 1 0.25 Kilometers
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 55

Figure 16. Cultural resources (east)

[

Cerro Bone

Peñasco Fosil

Cerro Palomas

Cerro Caracas

Cerro Camacho

Cerro Farallon

Cerro Playuela

Cerro Amargura

Cerro Malojillo

Cerro del Muerto

Cerro Matias Jalobre

μ 012 0.5 Miles

012 0.5 Kilometers

Puerto 

Ferro

Playa Caracas

(Red Beach)

Playa La Chiva

(Blue Beach)

Isla Chiva

Berdiales

Bahía 

Tapón

Camp Garcia

Punta Conejo

Cayo Yanuel

Ensenada Honda

Bahía Fanduca

Bahía Jolova

Playa Matías

(Yellow Beach) Cayo

Conejo

RocaAlcatraz

Bahia Salina 

del Sur

Tamarindo

Sur

Punta

Este

Playa

Blanca

Punta

Salinas

Playa 

Brava

Bahia 

Icacos

Isla

Yallis

Puerto 

Diablo

Punta 

Brigadier Punta 

Goleta Puerto Negro

Punta 

Campanilla

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustLagoons

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryIntermitent Stream10 meter contour

[ Historic and/or Archaeological Site
56 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

By the beginning of the Great Depression of the 1930s, the sugar plantations that were still operating 

faced an economic crisis and many families from Vieques left for the island of Saint Croix to pursue 

work opportunities. Between 1920 and 1940, the population in Vieques dropped from its peak of 

approximately 11,600 to 10,300. Ayala (2004) reported that between 1930 and 1940, 2,749 people 

emigrated from Vieques. After the expropriations of the 1940s, the population continued to decline 

until approximately 1960, and has shown slight increases since then. 

Between 1941 and 1947, the United States expropriated approximately 26,000 acres on the Island of 

Vieques for use by the Navy as a base and training facility. The expropriation of the lands on the 

eastern and western portions of the island left the civilian population with the zone in the center of the 

island. On August 25, 1941, the U.S. Congress approved Public Law 247, which authorized the Navy 

to assume immediate possession of the lands to be expropriated for the construction of the naval 

base in Vieques. Shortly after acquiring the lands, the Navy began construction activities on the 

military facilities in Vieques. For a few years, this construction activity provided employment 

opportunities for the local population. After the first several years of Navy presence, the construction 

job opportunities declined and since the potential for agricultural employment was greatly reduced, 

emigration from Vieques continued. The remaining population was restricted to a strip of land 

between the eastern and western military operations. 

For many years, segments of the Vieques population opposed the Navy presence and lobbied to stop 

the military activities. In 1980, members of Congress recommended that the Navy leave Vieques. In 

1983, the Government of Puerto Rico and the Navy entered into a Memorandum of Understanding 

regarding community assistance, land use, operation of the ranges, and environmental issues. That 

agreement established the conservation zones within the Navy-controlled areas. In 1999, a civilian 

security guard was killed by accident at the Observation Post adjacent to the Live Impact Area on 

eastern Vieques. That incident brought about an increase in the opposition to the Navy use of 

Vieques as a training area. In 2001, 4,000 acres of former Navy lands on western Vieques were 

transferred to the municipality, 800 acres to the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, and 3,100 acres to 

the Department of the Interior. That same year, a non-binding referendum was held and 68 percent 

of the Vieques voters demanded that the Navy cease military practices, clean-up, and “return” the 

lands. On May 1, 2003, military operations and bombing in Vieques ceased and the eastern lands 

(14,543 acres) were transferred to the administrative jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior. 

The Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial (land use plan), recently approved for Vieques, seeks to 

present guidelines for the island’s development. The documents include infrastructure projects and 

works consistent with the development vision established in the Sustainable Development Master 

Plan for the Municipality of Vieques. In 1999, by virtue of Executive Order 1999-21, the Vieques 

Special Commission and its Special Commissioner Office were created to evaluate the impacts of the 

Navy’s presence in Vieques. This office is an interagency means to facilitate the coordination 

between the Federal Government, the Government of Puerto Rico and its agencies, the Office of the 

Resident Commissioner, the municipality of Vieques, the private sector, and the community. 

EMPLOYMENT 

In Vieques, the total employment experienced a general increasing tendency from 1990 to 2002 

(Table 4). In the early 1990s, employment was at a low with 1,153 people employed. Later it 

recovered and in 1998 began to decline again, arriving at 1,292 people employed in 2001. In 2002, 

recovery returned with 1,389 people employed. The increases although small have been less 

significant than in Puerto Rico as a whole. Reports produced by the Puerto Rico Department of 

Labor indicate that Vieques is among the municipalities with the lowest average annual employment 

growth in the eastern region. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 57

Table 4. Average annual employment growth, by municipality (1990-2002) 

Municipality Annual Employment Growth (%) 

Juncos 4.3 

Culebra 4.2 

Patillas 3.5 

Rio Grande 1.7 

Fajardo 1.6 

Yabocoa 1.2 

Humacao 1.1 

Las Piedras 1.0 

Vieques 0.9 

Naguabo 0.7 

Maunabo 0.1 

Luquillo -1.7 

Ceiba -2.3 

Eastern Region 1.2 

Puerto Rico 1.6 

Information from: Puerto Rico Department of Labor and Human Resources 

The unemployment rate was 18.1 percent in 2002, and dropped to 16.0 percent in 2003. It is among 

the highest when compared to the surrounding municipalities in the region. The government is the 

principal employer in the municipality. In 2001, the government employed 41.1 percent of the 

workers. Based on this information, it can be seen that economic activity on the island is not very 

diverse. Other industries with reduced employment are manufacturing, insurance, and real estate. 

Employment has increased in construction and wholesale trade. 

Income 

The income level in Vieques is lower than in other areas of Puerto Rico with the average annual 

salary per worker reaching a maximum of $16,308 in 2002. Salaries vary from one industry to 

another but overall do not attain the levels of the other municipalities of Puerto Rico. 
58 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Commercial Activity 

Studies conducted in Vieques related to commercial activities have shown a reduction over time. In 

the case of sales at supermarkets and other food stores, construction materials, and eating and 

drinking establishments, there is an increase at the present time. The data shows that the number of 

establishments is decreasing by an average of 0.3 percent per year. 

Construction 

Based on the number of construction permits the Planning Board has granted, it appears that 

construction has increased during the last decade. 

Tourism Projects 

The Tourism Company of Puerto Rico reported that in January 2004, there were six tourism projects 

in Vieques. There are currently over 25 establishments providing lodging. These include small guest 

houses with only a few rooms to the Martineau Bay Resort with 138 rooms. There are more than 25 

eating establishments. 

Cost of Living 

The high cost of living has been one of the most frequent concerns expressed by the Viequenses. 

The necessity of transporting the major part of the products to the islands causes an increase in their 

costs. The existence of limited retail distribution channels also contributes to the price increases. 

POPULATION 

The total population of Vieques, according to the U.S. Census of 2000, was 9,106. Between 1970 

and 2000, the population of Vieques increased from 7,767 to 9,106, an increase of only 17.2 percent. 

By comparison, the overall population of Puerto Rico increased by 40.4 percent during this same time 

period. Selected demographic information from the census data is provided in Table 5. 

Table 5. Vieques selected population characteristics (from: U.S. Census 2000) 

VIEQUES SELECTED POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS 2000 

SUBJECT NUMBER PERCENT 

Total population 9,106 100.0

Male 4512 49.5

Female 4594 50.5

Under 18 years of age 2704 29.7

Average family size 3.36

Population in school 2,526

Percent high school graduate 

or higher (25 yrs or older) 50.3

Percent bachelor’s degree or 

higher (25 yrs or older) 10.1

Language at home English 1,221 14.5

Language at home Spanish 7,220 85.5
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 59

POLITICAL SETTING 

The Puerto Rico Constitution established a democratic form of government, divided into three branches: 

the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The legislative branch consists of a bicameral Legislative 

Assembly with a Senate (27 members) and a House of Representatives (51 members). The constitution 

requires the total membership in the assembly to be expanded, if necessary, to increase minority 

representation whenever one party controls more than two-thirds of the seats. 

A Resident Commissioner serves as Puerto Rico’s sole delegate to the U.S. Congress, holds limited 

powers as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives where he/she has a vote in committees 

but does not have a vote with the full House. The executive authority is vested in a Governor. 

Vieques is one of the 78 municipalities in Puerto Rico. Each municipality is administered by a mayor 

and a municipal assembly. All of these positions are elected. U.S. citizens, resident in Puerto Rico, 

age 18 and older, are eligible to vote in commonwealth and municipal elections. 

The Governor nominates leaders for the Cabinet level, other executive branch and public corporation 

leadership positions, under a highly centralized structure. The Secretary of State (who serves as acting 

governor in the chief executive's absence) must be confirmed by a majority vote of both chambers of 

the Legislative Assembly; other senior nominees require confirmation only by the Senate. 

PUBLIC USE 

The refuge’s public use occurs year-round from 6 a.m. to sunset. Recreational activities include wildlife 

observation, wildlife photography, interpretation, environmental education, fishing access, and beach 

use. Beach-related recreation, such as sunbathing, is the most popular activity on the refuge. A more 

detailed look at current levels of use is found in Alternative A - Current Management (No Action). 

Access to the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge occurs on both the western and eastern portions of 

the refuge. The western refuge consists of approximately 3,100 acres with recreational opportunities 

on areas known as Playa Grande, Punta Arenas (Green Beach), and Kiani Lagoon. The eastern 

refuge consists of approximately 14,573 acres with recreational opportunities at various beaches, but 

especially at Playa Caracas (Red Beach) and Playa La Chiva (Blue Beach). Currently, a major 

portion of the eastern refuge is closed due to the danger of unexploded ordnance and the cleanup 

process occurring in that area. 

Wildlife Observation 

The refuge has a wooden boardwalk located at Kiani Lagoon. The boardwalk extends around the 

lagoon. It provides an excellent view of Mt. Pirata, the highest elevation on the island and the original 

moist subtropical forest on Vieques. The number of people who visit the refuge to view wildlife is 

unknown, but many users who visit primarily for other reasons, such as beach use, also enjoy seeing 

wildlife. Currently, there are no designated wildlife observation trails but the public uses areas of 

open access to observe a myriad of butterflies and bird species. 

Wildlife Photography 

Although there are no photography blinds available for public use, visitors can photograph wildlife on 

the refuge in areas not restricted to access during refuge visiting hours. 
60 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Interpretation 

The refuge has an interpretive kiosk located at the head of the wooden board walk at Kiani Lagoon, 

describing elements of the mangrove swamp habitat and its ecological importance. The area is 

highly visited by local residents and tourists. Recently, an interpretive kiosk was located at the east 

entrance to the refuge describing the Service and Refuge Mission and informing the public of current 

recreational opportunities. The Service office hosts lecture programs occasionally during the year 

highlighting the island’s natural resources. 

Environmental Education 

The refuge has not developed a formal curriculum-based environmental education program. 

Although there is no formal program, the staff has taken college level students, local community 

groups, teacher workshop groups and school groups, both from Vieques and Puerto Rico, onto the 

refuge to teach them about the island’s ecosystems and management issues. Refuge staff has also 

brought environmental education activities to many local schools and local summer camp groups. 

Boating/Canoeing 

Naturally formed boat launching sites are located on both the eastern and western portions of the 

refuge. These sites are currently available for launching small water craft. All activities within the 

waters around the refuge are governed by state regulations. The boat ramps at the eastern refuge 

are at the east end of Playa La Chiva (Blue Beach), Conch Beach (in the Ensenada Honda area), 

and at Barracuda Bay also known as Puerto Ferro. 

The launch site at the western refuge is located by Kiani Lagoon. 

Fishing/Hunting 

Sport fishing access is allowed on the beachfront and in the lagoons, except for those areas that are 

posted closed. Fishing use is governed by state regulations. Hunting is not currently allowed on the 

refuge for a variety of reasons, including rare species and safety issues. 

Beach Use 

Beach recreation is the primary public use activity on the refuge. Primary recreational areas include 

Playa Grande and Punta Arena (Green Beach) at the western section of the refuge. Playa Caracas 

(Red Beach) and Playa La Chiva (Blue Beach) are the most visited at the eastern section of the 

refuge. However, there are other beaches used to a lesser extent. Punta Arena (Green Beach) and 

Playa La Chiva (Blue Beach) are also frequented on weekends and holidays by recreational boaters 

from Puerto Rico and other neighboring islands. Playa Caracas, Playa La Chiva, and Punta Arenas 

all have shelters and each has a picnic table. The shelters provide a shaded place for visitors to 

relax and enjoy their beach related activities. 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

The first archaeological excavations in Vieques were conducted by Irving B. Rouse in 1938. Rouse 

located 12 sites and excavated materials from four of them (located in the Esperanza, Martineau, La 

Mina, and Caño Hondo sectors). Collections from those sites are located in the Peabody Museum at 

Yale University. The findings of these and subsequent investigations have confirmed the presence of 

indigenous settlements in Vieques long before the arrival of the Spaniards and its colonization. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 61

Archaeological investigations (Figueredo, 1976 and Ecology and Environment, 1978-1984) indicate 

that the first settlers, the Archaic, may have arrived on the island between 3500 and 2500 B.C. One 

of the most important findings on Vieques from this period is the discovery of human remains known 

as the Puerto Ferro man. These bones of a man from almost 4,000 years ago were found in the area 

of Puerto Ferro. Ivonne Narganes Storde and Luis Chanlatte Baik from the Archaeological Research 

Center of the University of Puerto Rico at Río Piedras conducted the excavation and identified sites 

at La Hueca and Sorcé. 

Around the first century B.C., the Archaic inhabitants were replaced or acculturated by the Saladoid, 

a ceramic-using, agricultural group that is believed to have originated in the Orinoco area of South 

America and migrated north along the Lesser Antilles. In 1981, Goodwin postulated that the apparent 

age and uniqueness of materials from the La Hueca site on Vieques may indicate the area served as 

a location for cultural and trade interactions between the Archaic and the expanding Saladoid 

populations (Goodwin 200?). 

In 1980, archaeologists from the Museum of the Turabo University made excavations in the El 

Destino sector, located in the central mountainous part of Vieques. Among the findings there is the 

only batey of the Taino culture that has been documented on Vieques so far. Archaeological material 

from the El Destino and La Hueca sectors is currently displayed in the Museum of the Vieques 

Conservation and Historical Trust located at La Esperanza. Further archaeological findings related to 

pre-Hispanic cultures of the Caribbean were found in civilian areas of the island in 1983. 

Within the former military lands, archaeological research has been conducted since 1978. The U.S. 

firm, Ecology and Environment, Inc., was commissioned by the Navy to conduct a study, which 

produced the Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of Vieques’ Naval Reserve report. This report was 

submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office in 1984 and identified 247 sites of cultural and 

archaeological importance within the military zones. Thirty-three of these locations were 

recommended for inclusion in the National Registry of Historic Places. The Vieques archaeological 

sites listed in the National Register of Historic Places were included in 1991 and 1992. 

Early archaeological researchers agreed on the importance of conducting archaeological studies in 

the previously restrictive areas of the Navy. Prior to the transfer of the lands to the Department of the 

Interior, the Navy contracted R. Christopher Goodwin and Associates to conduct archaeological 

surveys on the Navy lands. While some segments of the survey project have been completed, the 

final reports are still pending publication. 

As of February 2001, 321 historic properties were recorded on the former Navy lands of eastern and 

western Vieques. The site types include isolated artifact find spots, pre-Columbian lithic and/or 

ceramic scatters, pre-Columbian middens (resource extractive stations/camps/villages/burials), 

petroglyphs, historic sites associated with the sugar plantation complex (i.e., Hacienda Puerto Ferro 

and Hacienda Arkadia), 18th - 20th century homesteads, and a historic lighthouse. The Navy, as part 

of its Section 110 inventory and as mitigation associated with its transfer of the former Vieques 

military facilities, contracted a number of archaeological, geomorphic, and paleoecological 

investigations. 

In 1997, a work plan for the development and implementation of surveys on the Navy lands was prepared 

in consultation with the Puerto Rico State Historic Preservation Office. That work plan presented an 

integrated model based upon 1) known prehistoric and historic cultural patterns on Vieques, in Puerto 

Rico, and the Virgin Islands; 2) distribution of recorded sites on the island; 3) assessment of methods 

employed and the results obtained by previous investigations; and 4) geomorphic landforms and natural 

resource distribution on the island. It has been refined based upon the recent investigations, which 
62 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

included archival, field, laboratory, and data analyses. The Navy has amassed digital sets of aerial 

photos (from the 1930s on), both black and white and colored infrared, to aid in the archaeological 

investigations and long-term habitat management. 

The island was broken down by drainage and divided into the following major zones (Table 6). The 

broader coastal area is made up of the salt ponds, mangroves and bayheads, thus coastal is not 

included in the predictive model table. 

y Salt ponds (and adjacent area) 

y Mangroves (and adjacent area) 

y Bayheads 

y Valley bottoms 

y Coastal areas 

y Uplands with slopes less than 15 percent 

y Uplands with slopes greater than 15 percent 

Table 6. Archaeological site predictive model 

Environment Archaic Early 

Ceramic Late Ceramic Early Colonial Late Colonial

Salt Ponds High Low Low Low Low 

Mangroves High Moderate/Low Moderate Low Low 

Bayheads Low/Moderate Moderate/High High High High 

Valley 

Bottoms Low High Moderate/High High Moderate/Low 

Uplands High/Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High 

Slopes Low Low Low Low Low 

During the Early Colonial Period, settlers focused on small-scale provision crop farming (e.g., cotton, 

tobacco, and coffee). Cattle and other types of livestock were the focus on the eastern part of the 

island as it was more arid. During the Late Colonial Period, ca. 1850s, the island’s economy had 

shifted to sugar production. 

Modern plant communities and soil classification appear to be poor predictors of pre-Columbian 

settlement patterns on Vieques. During historic periods, vast areas of the island were under 

cultivation regardless of the soil regime. During prehistory, access to potable water and marine 

resources were more important determinants of site locations than immediate proximity to good 

agriculture land, except during a few centuries following first colonization of island by agricultural 

groups (early Saladoid). 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 63

WILDERNESS 

When the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge was established, the legislation stated that “The 

Secretary of the Interior shall assume responsibility for the administration of the Live Impact Area 

upon transfer under paragraph (1) of subsection (b), administer that area as a wilderness area under 

the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), and deny public access to the area.” While this 

language directs the management of the Live Impact Area and requires that it be closed to public 

access, it does not appear to establish the area as a formal wilderness area. The definition of 

wilderness in the Wilderness Act states that: “A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man 

and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its 

community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An 

area of wilderness is further defined to mean, in this Act, an area of undeveloped federal land 

retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, 

which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1) generally 

appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work 

substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined 

type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make 

practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, 

geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.” In addition, the 

normal criteria for establishing wilderness under the Wilderness Act would require that the area be 

5,000 acres or larger without roads. 

Refuge planning policy requires a wilderness review concurrent with the comprehensive conservation 

planning process. A team of Service and Department of Natural and Environmental Resources 

personnel met at the Vieques Refuge to evaluate the potential for wilderness designation. The team 

inventoried refuge lands within the planning area and found no areas that meet the eligibility criteria 

for a wilderness study area as defined by the Wilderness Act. Therefore, the suitability of refuge 

lands for wilderness designation is not analyzed further in this plan. A summary of the wilderness 

review is included in Appendix VI. 
64 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 65

III. Alternatives 

INTRODUCTION 

This chapter describes management alternatives for Vieques National Wildlife Refuge. Each alternative 

addresses several aspects of refuge management, including habitat, public use, and administrative 

functions. The first section of this chapter gives a brief description of the alternatives with examples of 

the types of activities included. To give the reader an understanding of the requirements of the Refuge 

System to ensure authorized activities do not adversely affect the mission of the refuge, a background 

on “compatibility determinations” is provided. Also included is a discussion of the management actions 

that are common to all the alternatives and that the Service plans to implement regardless of which 

alternative is chosen. Following this discussion is a section which describes the three proposed 

alternatives in the format of goals, objectives, and strategies. Strategies are listed from those common 

to other alternatives to those specific to each alternative, when applicable. The last section describes 

major strategies considered but eliminated from further consideration. 

Following the text describing the alternatives is a matrix that shows the differences among the 

alternatives (Table 7). The matrix compares and contrasts the alternatives by their specific 

management actions and strategies. These actions and strategies, in turn, are grouped according to 

the refuge goals. Generally, the matrix is a summary of the alternatives chapter. 

FORMULATING ALTERNATIVES 

The alternatives are packages of complementary management strategies and specific actions for 

achieving the missions of the National Wildlife Refuge System and the Service, the vision and goals 

of the refuge, and the purposes for which the refuge was established. They propose different ways of 

supporting the goals and responding to key issues, management concerns, and opportunities 

identified during both the internal and public scoping processes. 

The three alternatives identified and evaluated represent different approaches and different levels of 

management to provide for protection, restoration, and management of the refuge’s fish, wildlife, 

plants, habitats, and other resources, while accommodating differing levels of compatible public use 

activities. A major factor considered during the development of the alternatives was to ensure that all 

of the proposals were realistic, feasible, and legally viable considering the constraints of the 

legislation establishing the refuge and the agency policies and guidance. The physical and biological 

condition of the refuge, along with the issues and concerns of the community, was assessed by the 

planning team and considered during the development of goals for the refuge. The objectives and 

strategies were then formulated for each of the alternatives. While the goals remain constant, the 

objectives and strategies for reaching refuge goals may vary depending on the alternative. 

Clean-up of contaminated areas would proceed under all alternatives. Each alternative was 

developed with the assumption that the clean-up would be accomplished and the proposed strategies 

would be implemented without threats to human health or the resources being managed. 

GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVES 

The alternatives were guided by different approaches to habitat management, public use, and the 

levels of funding and staffing in support of basic refuge operations. 
66 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

ALTERNATIVE A (CURRENT MANAGEMENT OR NO-ACTION) 

The current management alternative provides for a continuation of the existing level of management. 

Staffing would remain at the current levels and ongoing programs and activities would continue with 

only minor changes and no new programs. 

 

ALTERNATIVE B (RESOURCE EMPHASIS) 

This alternative focuses on wildlife and habitat management but maintains the existing visitor 

programs and public uses. Habitat management and monitoring would be expanded and agreements 

with research, governmental, and non-governmental organizations would be developed to provide 

information needed for the management of forests, grasslands, coastal wetlands, beaches, and listed 

species and their habitats. In partnership with others, programs would be developed for management 

of nesting sea turtle populations on Vieques beaches. 

ALTERNATIVE C (HABITAT AND PUBLIC USE EMPHASIS) - PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE 

This alternative directs the refuge toward a realistic and achievable level of both habitat and public 

use management and addresses the needs of the resources and, where appropriate and compatible 

with the refuge purposes, the needs of the community. This alternative provides for increases in 

management efforts to restore the refuge habitats without diminishing the wildlife values associated 

with the current conditions. There is also a focus on management activities to benefit threatened and 

endangered species. This includes the possible reintroduction of extirpated species, such as the 

Yellow-shouldered Blackbird, and expansion of populations of species already found on the refuge, 

such as Cobana negra and Goetzia elegans. Priority public uses (as identified in the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Improvement Act) would be expanded and other uses that are determined to be 

compatible with the refuge mission would be permitted. Historic and archaeological resources would 

be stabilized and, where possible, interpretation of their significance and role in the evolution of the 

refuge would be provided. 

PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE 

The planning team proposed Alternative C for managing Vieques National Wildlife Refuge over the 

next 15 years. After public review of the draft comprehensive conservation plan and environmental 

impact statement, the planning team addressed comments and incorporated changes as necessary. 

Implementing the proposed alternative will result in an enhanced habitat management program and 

increased public use opportunities. 

An overriding concern reflected in this plan is that wildlife conservation is the first priority in refuge 

management. The Service allows public uses if they are compatible and appropriate with wildlife and 

habitat conservation. The refuge would emphasize wildlife-dependent public uses (e.g., hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation). 

COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATIONS 

Federal law and Service policy provide the direction and planning framework to protect the Refuge 

System from incompatible or harmful human activities, and to ensure that Americans can enjoy 

Refuge System lands and waters. The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, 

as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-57), is 

the key legislation regarding management of public uses and compatibility. The compatibility 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 67

requirements of the Refuge Improvement Act were adopted in the Service’s Final Compatibility 

Regulations and Final Compatibility Policy published October 18, 2000 (Federal Register, Vol. 65, 

No. 202, pp 62458-62496). This Compatibility Rule changed or modified Service regulations 

contained in Chapter 50, Parts 25, 26, and 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations (USFWS 2000c). 

To view the policy and regulations online, go to http://policy.fws.gov/library/00fr62483.pdf. 

The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 and Service regulations require that 

an affirmative finding be made of an activity’s “compatibility” before such activity or use is allowed on 

a national wildlife refuge. A compatible use is one, “...that will not materially interfere with or detract 

from the fulfillment of the mission of the Refuge System or the purposes of the refuge.” Six priority 

wildlife-dependent uses that are to be considered include: hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, 

wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation. These priority wildlifedependent uses may be authorized on a refuge when they are compatible (as defined above) and not 

inconsistent with public safety. Not all uses that are determined compatible may be allowed. The 

refuge has the discretion to allow or disallow any use based on other considerations, such as public 

safety, policy, and available funding. However, all uses that are allowed must be determined 

compatible. Except for consideration of consistency with State laws and regulations, as provided for 

in subsection (m) of the Improvement Act, no other determinations or findings are required to be 

made by the refuge official under the Improvement Act or the Refuge Recreation Act for wildlifedependent recreation to occur (Refuge Improvement Act). 

Compatibility determinations for the priority public uses and other activities identified in Alternative C 

(proposed alternative) are included in Appendix IX. Any additional activities identified in revisions to 

the CCP/EIS will also require compatibility determinations. The uses included in the proposed 

alternative have been found to be compatible with both the mission of the Refuge System and the 

purposes for which the refuge was established. The compatibility determinations for these activities 

are being issued as part of this CCP/EIS. 

MANAGEMENT HIGHLIGHTS COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES 

This section only includes those strategies that are the same or essentially the same under all 

alternatives. These are strategies that may have received prior approval and funding; are in accord 

with previous agreements; were identified as important issues during scoping, need quick resolution, 

and would not result in significant environmental impacts; or would accomplish the purposes of the 

refuge and are appropriate for all alternatives. 

Emergency Access. The need for access to boats secured in Puerto Ferro during periods of 

hurricane watches and warnings was identified during the public scoping process. To accommodate 

this need and help provide security for boaters and their vessels during times of weather-related 

emergencies, the refuge would develop a formal procedure for permitting limited access through the 

refuge when hurricane watches or warnings have been issued by the National Weather Service. 

Upgrade Entrance to the Eastern Refuge Lands. The entrance to the eastern refuge lands would be 

upgraded to provide an aesthetically pleasing access to the refuge. The former use of the lands for 

military training required a level of security beyond that necessary for administration of a national 

wildlife refuge. While some level of security is necessary to prevent animal trespass and 

unauthorized uses of refuge resources, the entrance should provide an attractive and welcoming 

appearance to visitors. To achieve this, the entrance road and gate would be redesigned to meet 

Fish and Wildlife Service standards. 
68 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Fence Removal. Boundary fences separating the eastern refuge lands from private and municipal 

lands would be removed and reconstructed with materials appropriate for a refuge boundary. 

Upgrade Road to Playa Caracas and Playa de la Chiva. This project is associated with the previously 

mentioned entrance upgrade. The existing roadway to the heavily utilized beach areas at Playa 

Caracas and Playa de la Chiva is rough and dusty. This project would improve drainage, facilitate 

future maintenance of the roadway, and reduce the amount of dust generated by vehicle use. 

Navy Clean-Up Activities. One of the significant issues brought out during the public scoping for the 

plan was the clean-up of contaminants and unexploded ordnance remaining from former military 

activities. The Service is committed to working with the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Environmental Quality Board, and the Navy to maximize clean-up of refuge lands in accordance with 

the provisions of the Federal Facilities Agreement between the agencies. The goal of the Service is to 

seek to ensure the refuge is cleaned of contaminants that pose a threat to the health and safety of the 

wildlife, as well as residents, staff, and visitors to Vieques. To accomplish this goal the Service would:

y Participate with Navy, Environmental Quality Board, Environmental Protection Agency, and 

community representatives during the development of documents and clean-up plans for all 

former Navy lands. 

y Coordinate development of refuge management plans to ensure that clean-up addresses 

needs of the resources and visitors to the refuge. 

y Facilitate access by Navy and its contractors to the sites under investigation or being cleaned. 

y Make unused facilities available for Navy and contract personnel during the clean-up process. 

y Review plans and proposed actions to ensure consideration of human health and 

environmental concerns. 

y Provide a full-time staff member to review documents and work with the environmental 

restoration associated with former military activities. 

Fire Management. The refuge would continue to maintain cooperative agreements with the 

appropriate state and local fire suppression agencies to support basic wildfire suppression operations 

on the refuge. Fire suppression capabilities necessary to complement state and local fire 

suppression forces to contain and suppress wildfires within the refuge would be developed and 

maintained by the refuge. Prescribed burning and limited mechanical clearing within those areas that 

are justified by the need to reduce fuel accumulations or address fire management concerns under 

the Wildlands Urban Interface Program would be implemented, and the use of prescribed fire and 

wildfire prevention and control measures would be considered as needed for habitat management 

and protection of refuge resources and adjacent communities. 

 

Research and Educational Access. Access for basic research and educational activities related to 

the habitats and resources located within the refuge would be facilitated and encouraged. 

Informational and Directional Signing. Under all alternatives, the refuge would develop and install 

improved directional and informational signing to facilitate public utilization and access to the 

opened areas. 

Wilderness Management. In accordance with the legislation transferring administration of the 

Vieques lands to the Department of the Interior, the area formerly identified as the Live Impact Area 

would be managed the same as a “Wilderness Area,” with no public access permitted. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 69

Land Exchange “Parcel C.” The Service would continue to seek agreement with the municipality of 

Vieques and/or the commonwealth for the exchange of “Parcel C” for another area or areas of equal 

value that are suitable for resource management purposes. “Parcel C” on the northwest portion of the 

eastern refuge unit (near the current municipality landfill) was transferred to the Fish and Wildlife 

Service as a separate parcel. Although the remainder of the lands transferred to the Service cannot be 

exchanged or disposed of without congressional approval, “Parcel C” does not fall under that restriction. 

Historic and Archaeological Sites. Agreements would be sought with commonwealth agencies or 

non-governmental organizations for the stabilization, restoration, and/or protection of historic and 

archaeological resources on the refuge. 

Building Demolition and Removal. Deteriorated and unused buildings formerly used by the Navy 

would be demolished and removed. Some facilities would be utilized by the Navy and clean-up 

contractors during the clean-up process. 

Septic System Rehabilitation. The septic system at Camp Garcia would be rehabilitated and 

reactivated to serve the needs of clean-up personnel, refuge staff, and the public. 

RELATIONSHIP OF ISSUES TO GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES 

The refuge goals were developed to give general direction to the management focus of the refuge. 

The issues identified during the scoping process have been separated to fit within one of these broad 

goals. During the development of the alternatives, the planning team attempted to ensure that each 

issue identified during the scoping phase was considered and, where appropriate, objectives and 

strategies were developed to help address the issue. Since each of the alternatives has a different 

focus, not all issues are addressed in each alternative. 

ALTERNATIVE A (NO-ACTION – CURRENT MANAGEMENT) 

MANAGEMENT FOCUS 

In addition to the strategies that are constant for all of the alternatives, this alternative would provide 

for a continuation of many activities that have already been initiated and funded. The refuge would 

essentially maintain the current level and focus of management. This alternative establishes a 

baseline for comparing and contrasting other alternatives. Under Alternative A, the refuge would 

continue to provide limited habitat and species management, monitor wildlife populations, and 

maintain existing public access and opportunities for recreational activities. Former Navy facilities not 

necessary for the refuge or clean-up activities would be removed. The access roads to Playa la 

Chiva and Playa Caracas would be maintained to provide for public and management access. The 

refuge headquarters would remain in rental facilities and staffing would not change. Historic and 

archaeological sites would receive minimal stabilization and protection from natural and human 

disturbance, however, the Service would continue to seek agreements with commonwealth agencies 

or non-governmental organizations to stabilize, restore, and/or protect important sites and structures. 

The specific strategies associated with this alternative are discussed below under each of the 

refuge goals. 

GOAL 1: (HABITAT) Conserve, enhance, and restore native plant communities and wetland habitats 

and their associated fish, wildlife, and plants, representative of the native biological diversity that would 

have been found on Vieques Refuge lands prior to major agricultural and military use of the lands. 
70 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Discussion: Under the no action or current management alternative, habitat activities are limited by 

resources, restrictions on access to areas requiring clean-up, and priority public use needs. Efforts to 

establish baseline information would continue. Monitoring programs and plans would be developed for 

the highest priority habitat restoration projects, while maintaining current levels of public use activities. 

Issue: Restore Lagoon Hydrology 

Objective: Conduct annual evaluations and manage lagoon openings to improve habitat and 

wildlife utilization. 

Strategies: 

y Evaluate habitat conditions within the lagoons to determine if changes in hydrology would be 

necessary or beneficial to the system and, if appropriate, open at least one lagoon each year 

to permit tidal flushing. 

y Facilitate the restoration of lagoon hydrology by consulting with and obtaining any necessary 

permits from the Corps of Engineers or commonwealth agencies for removal of blockages 

from the lagoon openings to the sea. 

Issue: Restoration of Forest Habitats 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop a specific plan for the long-term 

management of the mangrove forest/lagoon systems on the refuge. 

Stragegy: 

y Continue to document and monitor the conditions and extent of the mangroves and lagoon 

systems, but not increase efforts to plant or expand either the mangroves or upland forest 

habitats. 

Issue: Fire Management 

Objective: Complete a fire management plan by 2008, to define when, where, and how fire 

would be controlled and managed for habitat benefits and community safety. 

 

Stragegy: 

y Develop first phase of fire management plan by identifying and mapping the location of 

firebreaks to be established and maintained to protect adjacent communities. This would be 

accomplished by 2007, and incorporated into the plan along with identification of any needed 

fire suppression equipment and supplies to implement the fire control program. Fire 

equipment and supplies would be identified in budget request by 2008. 

Issue: Feral Animal Control 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, initiate a program to control feral animal 

population to prevent damage to native species and their habitats, and eliminate conflicts with 

management programs and authorized public uses. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 71

Strategy: 

y Require owners (when they can be identified) of horses, cattle, dogs, and cats to remove their 

animals from the refuge. This procedure would continue with no additional efforts to identify 

control mechanisms for domestic animals. 

Issue: Research Cooperation 

Objective: Provide opportunities for wildlife research to address refuge resource and 

management needs. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to permit and, as appropriate, provide support for relevant wildlife- and 

management-oriented research activities as requested from the academic community. 

GOAL 2: Monitor, protect, and recover special status animals, plants, and species of management 

interest. 

Discussion: The management program for selected species of interest is currently focused on 

monitoring, reducing potential threats, and conducting limited habitat manipulation. Volunteers and 

cooperators are essential to the continuation of the ongoing sea turtle monitoring and tagging 

program. Vegetation surveys of areas that are currently accessible have been funded and would be 

completed to provide baseline information for those areas. 

Issue: Threatened and Endangered Species Management 

Objective: Monitor, protect, and enhance federally listed plant and animal species and their 

essential habitats within the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to monitor sea turtle nesting activities in cooperation with the Puerto Rico 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, non-governmental organizations, 

universities, local schools, and the community. This program includes a saturation tagging 

program on Matias Beach (Yellow). As part of the sea turtle program to protect habitat and 

nests from natural and human induced activities, such as predation and poaching, public use 

would be limited. Refuge staff would also focus on enhancement of coastal vegetation to 

provide suitable habitat and development of an improved education/outreach program. This 

would inform the public of the reasons and needs to ensure protection of these species. 

y Continue to conduct surveys for threatened and endangered plants on the refuge and 

incorporate results into any management or development plans. 

y Conduct routine refuge patrols to identify the presence of roseate terns and their use of 

habitats on or near the refuge. If nesting sites are identified on the refuge, measures would 

be implemented to ensure that potential human disturbance to the colonies would be avoided. 

y Conduct surveys to determine presence of the Virgin Islands tree boa on the refuge. Surveys 

would be conducted by refuge staff or researchers. 
72 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

y Continue to assist other organizations with studies of manatee movement patterns in eastern 

Puerto Rico and in response to marine mammal stranding events on the refuge. 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, complete an inventory of all vascular and nonvascular plants with a specific emphasis on federal and commonwealth listed species. 

Strategy: 

y Conduct surveys of all accessible refuge lands (where there is no threat from unexploded 

ordnance or contamination) and develop a catalog of all species found. Surveys would be 

conducted by refuge staff or cooperators. 

Issue: Wading Bird, Waterfowl, and Shorebird Management

Objective: Evaluate and manage wading birds, waterfowl, and shorebirds to ensure the stability 

of their populations and to maintain the health of these populations and meet their habitat 

requirements. 

Strategy: 

y Conduct preliminary surveys in order to obtain baseline data on wading birds and waterfowl 

found within the wetland areas of the refuge. Surveys would be conducted by refuge staff or 

cooperators seasonally to determine the importance of the habitat as a stopover during 

migration. Surveys would also be conducted to obtain approximate numbers of migratory 

shorebirds using the shallow flats and lagoon areas of the refuge as part of their winter 

migratory routes. 

Issue: Sea Bird Management

Objective: Evaluate and manage sea birds to ensure the stability of their populations, to 

maintain the health of the populations, and to meet their habitat requirements. 

Strategy: 

y Conduct surveys to evaluate potential nesting sites for sea birds on the refuge, but no other 

potential management studies or activities would be implemented. 

Issue: Other Birds 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, develop a formal plan for conducting surveys and a 

banding program for resident and migratory birds. 

Strategy: 

y Continue the 3-day winter and 3-day summer mist netting and banding program initiated on 

western Vieques when the refuge was established. Surveys would be conducted by refuge 

staff or cooperators. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 73

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, establish survey routes within subtropical moist 

and dry forests to track population trends of key species (e.g., white-crowned pigeon and 

Adelaide’s warbler) in these habitats. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to coordinate with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources to 

conduct surveys for the white-crowned pigeon. 

Issue: Fishery Management 

Objective: By 2008, in conjunction with the Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources, develop a fishery resource plan to aid in establishing management programs and 

fishing regulations for refuge lagoon systems. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to provide information to the public and enforce commonwealth fishing regulations. 

GOAL 3: Provide opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation and education to enhance public 

appreciation, understanding, and enjoyment of refuge wildlife, habitats, and cultural history. 

Discussion: Public use on the eastern and western refuge lands currently occurs primarily at Playa 

Arenas (Green Beach), de la Chiva (Blue Beach), and Caracas (Red Beach). The available facilities 

to accommodate the public use activities include unpaved roadways, beach shelters, and a 

boardwalk trail at Kiani Lagoon. 

Strategies: 

y Maintain facilites within existing resources. Other than the improvements indicated above 

under the section entitled “Management Highlights Common to All Alternatives,” no new 

projects would be developed. 

y Continue to give priority to wildlife-dependent recreational activities, as identified in the Refuge 

System Improvement Act of 1997. These activities include: hunting, fishing, wildlife 

observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation. 

Issue: Recreational Beach Activities

Objective: Within five years of plan approval, develop an agreement with an appropriate entity to 

manage compatible recreational activities at high public use beaches on the refuge. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to monitor and maintain the existing recreation facilities at Playas Arenas (Green 

Beach), de la Chiva (Blue Beach), and Caracas (Red Beach). Development of opportunities 

for use of additional areas or expanded activities would be minimal. 
74 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Issue: Public Access 

Objective: Where safe and practical, provide public access to refuge sites for wildlife-oriented and 

compatible non-wildlife-oriented activities to address community needs. General public access has 

traditionally been permitted to beach areas where it is safe to conduct recreational activities. 

Strategy: 

y Permit access to open areas from dawn to dusk to accommodate a majority of the traditional 

uses. 

Issue: Collection of Sea Grapes and Coconuts 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, establish guidelines and officially open designated 

portions of the refuge for collection of sea grapes and coconuts for personal consumption. 

Historic use of the coastal portions of the refuge lands includes the collection of sea grapes and 

coconuts. 

Strategies: 

y Ensure protection of the resources by assessing historic uses and potential impacts of 

removal of sea grapes and coconuts. 

y Identify areas that are appropriate for harvest of these resources and any regulations that are 

necessary to ensure the resources are protected for the future. 

y Develop a Federal Register notice to officially open selected areas for harvest and establish 

any necessary regulations. 

Issue: Fishing 

Objective: Evaluate need and provide improved access for fishing opportunities at a variety of 

locations on the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to permit fishing, which is a traditional activity along the refuge beaches and in the 

lagoons, during daylight hours in the open areas of the refuge. 

y Maintain the existing boardwalk trail and fishing platform at Laguna Kiani. 

y Conduct an experimental special use permit program for night fishing. This program would be 

used to evaluate the demand, potential impacts, and compatibility of night fishing on the 

refuge. 

y Continue to permit access to sites with historic use as launch ramps for fishing access during 

open hours. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 75

Issue: Hunting 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, complete an evaluation of potential target species 

and habitats to determine if a hunting program is feasible. At the present time, no hunting is 

permitted anywhere on the refuge. Under this alternative, there would be no change in this policy. 

Issue: Land Crabbing 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, complete a formal evaluation of the opportunities 

for land crabbing on both the eastern and western refuge lands. Capture of land crabs is a 

traditional activity that may be appropriate where it is sustainable and can be conducted without 

long-term impacts on the crabs or other resources. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to conduct an experimental land crab trapping program at designated sites on the 

eastern refuge. 

y Cooperate with an ongoing National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration study of 

contamination in land crabs to determine advisability of human consumption of crabs from 

different areas of the refuge. 

Issue: Interpretive Programs 

Discussion: The refuge currently provides a very limited interpretive program. Under this alternative, 

the refuge would continue a limited interpretive program. 

Objective: Provide and enhance non-personal and personal interpretive media and programs 

that increase awareness and understanding of the refuge’s natural and cultural resources. 

Issue: Environmental Education Programs 

Objective: Provide and enhance environmental education. 

Strategies: 

y Develop a multi-faceted, curriculum-based program for use on and off the refuge to enhance 

public awareness and understanding of the refuge’s resources and to inspire action among 

local, national, and international educational groups on behalf of the refuge and Vieques 

Island. 

y Continue to conduct limited environmental education programs for Vieques school groups and 

other educational institutions of Puerto Rico. 
76 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Issue: Camping 

Discussion: Camping has historically been a recreational activity on Vieques beaches, especially 

during the Easter season. Under the current management program, no camping is permitted. 

Objective: Determine, within two years of plan approval, if and when camping could be permitted 

on the refuge. 

Issue: Commercial Activities 

Discussion: Commercial activities, such as rental of kayaks, beach umbrellas, sales of food or drinks, 

and providing guide services, have been proposed as potential benefits to visitors and as an 

economic benefit to the local community. No commercial or concession activities would be 

authorized under this alternative. 

Objective: Within five years of plan approval, complete necessary evaluations to identify and 

implement appropriate and compatible commercial or concession activities. 

Issue: Interpretation and Conservation of Historical and Archaeological Sites 

Discussion: Historic and archaeological sites on the refuge receive only the minimum level of 

maintenance and management. Access to the sites is limited and interpretation has not been 

provided. Several sites on the refuge are significant to the understanding of local and regional 

historic and prehistoric cultures. Under the current management program, existing levels of access 

would be maintained and interpretation would continue to be very limited. 

Objective: Within four years of plan approval, provide interpretive signing, information, and 

appropriate conservation of historical and archaeological sites on refuge lands. 

Issue: Law Enforcement 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop an effective cooperative law enforcement 

program with commonwealth agencies to address illegal activities on refuge lands. 

Strategy: 

y Continue the current refuge law enforcement program to ensure staff are trained, equipped, 

and scheduled to provide adequate security for visitors and refuge personnel. Cooperation 

with commonwealth law enforcement agencies would be facilitated to provide additional 

enforcement presence on refuge lands. 

GOAL 4: Through cooperative efforts with partners, ensure that the refuge is cleaned of all classes 

of contaminants that could pose a threat to the health and safety of wildlife, residents, staff, and 

visitors. 

Discussion: Effective natural resource management, wildlife-dependent recreational uses, and other 

potential uses of the refuge cannot be realized without a comprehensive clean-up of unexploded 

ordnance and other contaminants that remain from prior uses of the lands. Current efforts under the 

provisions of CERCLA are being carried out to address the contaminants issues on the areas 

currently being managed as the refuge. Clean-up activities would likely continue beyond the 

timeframe of this comprehensive conservation plan. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 77

Issue: Wildlife and Human Exposure to Contaminants and Explosives 

Objective: Throughout the clean-up process, ensure that the threats and impacts from contaminants, 

unexploded ordnance, munitions and explosives of concern, or explosive constituents to nearby 

communities, visitors, wildlife, and employees are removed to the greatest degree possible. Assure 

that clean-up standards protective of wildlife, plants, and habitats are met. 

Strategies: 

y Participate with the Navy, Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Quality Board, 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, and community representatives during 

the development of documents and clean-up plans for all former Navy lands. 

y Coordinate the development of refuge management plans with the above agencies to ensure 

that clean-up addresses the needs of the resources and visitors to the refuge. 

Objective: Ensure that refuge resources are adequately protected during the clean-up process. 

Strategy: 

y Ensure a clear role in the clean-up process by participating in the development and 

implementation of the Federal Facilities Agreement that identifies roles and guides the 

agencies during the clean-up. 

GOAL 5: Provide the resources needed to implement the selected management alternative. 

Discussion: Effective management of wildlife, habitat, and public uses, as well as conducting other 

resource management activities, requires personnel, equipment, and facilities. The current level of 

staffing, the existing office and maintenance area, and ongoing programs would be maintained under 

this alternative. In accordance with the legislation transferring administration of the Vieques lands to 

the Department of the Interior, the area formerly identified as the Live Impact Area would be 

managed similar to a “Wilderness Area,” with no public access permitted. 

Issue: Equipment Needs 

Objective: Annually evaluate needs and submit funding requests to acquire and maintain 

equipment necessary to perform identified management activities. 

Strategy: 

y Develop and maintain Refuge Operation Needs System (RONS) and Service Asset 

Maintenance Management System (SAMMS) project lists and equipment needs. These 

programs provide the mechanism to identify needs and request the funding for essential 

facilities, services, equipment, and management activities. 
78 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Issue: Facility Needs 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, formalize plans and funding proposals for visitor 

contact facilities, interpretive displays, and office space to accommodate visitor and staffing 

needs. All new facilities proposed will comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (1992) and 

the Architectural Barriers Act (1968). 

Strategies: 

y Maintain the existing office and visitor contact space at the current rental location in Isabel 

Segunda. 

y Maintain the informational kiosk adjacent to the Kiani Lagoon boardwalk trail. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop plans and funding proposals for 

maintenance facilities to support the selected alternative. 

Strategy: 

y Maintain the existing maintenance facilities at the rental space in Isabel Segunda with 

additional maintenance activities taking place at the limited facilities currently being utilized at 

the Camp Garcia site. 

Objective: Provide meeting and laboratory space for researchers conducting biological, 

archaeological, or historical investigation to benefit refuge management activities. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to utilize current office/maintenance rental space in Isabel Segunda for researchers 

conducting biological, archaeological, or historical investigations whenever the facilities are 

available and their use is appropriate. 

 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, develop hiking trails to provide access to 

selected sites for wildlife-dependent public uses. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to maintain access to roads and trails currently open for wildlife-dependent and other 

compatible public use activities. 

Objective: Provide adequate parking for refuge visitors while minimizing impacts on the natural 

resources. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to maintain existing levels of parking at Playa Caracas, Playa La Chiva, and Punta 

Arenas. No expansion or redesign of the parking sites are proposed under this alternative. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 79

Issue: Real Property Management 

Discussion: As noted in other sections of this plan, the only land that the Service has authority to 

dispose of is the 98-acre parcel referred to as “Parcel C.” Regulations require that the Service 

receive lands of comparable value for any lands transferred out of the Refuge System. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, evaluate potential alternatives for land disposal 

and acquisition. 

Strategy: 

y Continue coordination efforts with the commonwealth and municipality to develop a plan for 

the exchange of “Parcel C” to meet community needs and comply with Service requirements. 

Issue: Staffing Needs 

Discussion: This alternative would maintain the current level of staffing (eleven full-time employees) 

to conduct ongoing programs and activities (Figure 17). 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, provide both permanent and temporary staff 

needed to accomplish the strategies identified under the selected alternative. 

Issue: Use of Volunteers 

Objective: The use of volunteers facilitates the accomplishment of many refuge programs and 

permits refuge staff to focus on the highest priority activities. Within one year of plan approval, 

develop a formal refuge policy to incorporate volunteers as a routine component of the refuge 

management program. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to seek assistance from and accept and work with volunteers to accomplish refuge 

objectives and strategies identified in this alternative. 

GOAL 6: Develop effective and open means of communication with Vieques citizens, interested 

groups, and organizations to raise public awareness of refuge programs, management decisions, and 

the mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

Discussion: An effective outreach program is essential to maintain communication with the 

community and ensure that factual information about the Service, refuge plans, and management 

programs is available. 

 

Issue: External Communications 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop and implement a formal outreach plan to 

ensure community awareness of refuge programs and activities. 

Strategy: 

y Continue with ongoing communication techniques through news releases, flyers, and 

meetings with organized groups and individuals. 
80 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 17. Organization of personnel under Alternative A 

Refuge Manager 

GS 12

Refuge Biologist 

GS 11 

Administrative 

Officer 

GS 5-6 

Refuge 

Law Enforcement 

GS 5-7-9 

Refuge 

Law Enforcement

GS 5-7-9 

Refuge 

Law Enforcement

GS 5-7 

Outreach 

Coordinator 

GS 9-11 

Maintenance 

 Worker 

WG 5-7

Fire 

Management 

GS 5-7

Laborer 

WG 3 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 81

ALTERNATIVE B (RESOURCE EMPHASIS) 

MANAGEMENT FOCUS 

In addition to the strategies that are constant for each of the alternatives and those that are presented 

in Alternative A, this alternative would provide for an increase in the programs, activities, and projects 

oriented toward resource management. The refuge would develop additional programs and 

strategies with a primary focus on natural resource management and compatible wildlife-dependent 

public uses. A refuge headquarters, visitor contact station, and maintenance facility would be 

planned and developed in the vicinity of Camp Garcia. Additional public use facilities for some 

wildlife-dependent activities would be developed. Historical and archaeological sites would receive 

minimal stabilization and protection from natural and human disturbance, however, the Service would 

continue to seek agreements with commonwealth agencies or non-governmental organizations to 

stabilize, restore, and/or protect important sites and structures. 

The specific strategies associated with this alternative are discussed below under each of the refuge goals. 

GOAL 1: Conserve, enhance, and restore native plant communities and wetland habitats and their 

associated fish, wildlife, and plants, representative of the native biological diversity that would have 

been found on Vieques Refuge lands prior to major agricultural and military use of the lands. 

Discussion: Under the wildlife emphasis alternative, habitat management activities would take 

precedence over other activities, and intensive efforts would be initiated to manage, restore, and 

improve the habitats and wildlife utilization of refuge lands. Increases in resources would be directed 

toward the new and expanded wildlife management programs. Compatible wildlife-dependent public 

uses would be encouraged and programs and facilities to support these uses would be developed. 

Issue: Restore Lagoon Hydrology 

Objective: Conduct annual evaluations and manage lagoon openings to improve habitat and wildlife 

utilization. 

Strategies: 

y Provide an intensive wildlife management program that would involve the development of a 

monitoring program to assess current conditions and the effects of opening lagoons on the 

associated habitats. Information from the monitoring program would be used to identify the 

highest priority lagoon system for management and restoration. 

y Conduct hydrologic studies to assess whether or not restoration actions are necessary to 

maximize the productivity of Kiani Lagoon. Since primary jurisdiction over tidal waters is 

normally with the commonwealth, all proposed actions involving the opening of lagoons or 

other habitat restoration activities in or adjacent to commonwealth waters would be closely 

coordinated with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources. 

y Obtain any appropriate permits and open two to four lagoons each year to permit tidal 

flushing, after evaluation and determination that opening of the lagoons is appropriate and 

beneficial to the refuge. Follow-up would be conducted at these sites to maintain openings 

and monitor habitat and species utilization changes. Specific projects that have been 

identified to aid in restoring lagoon hydrology include the following: 1) Remove the rock groin 

at the mouth of Laguna Boca Quebrada. Monitor the area to determine if additional work is 
82 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

needed; 2) Construct connections to provide circulation between Laguna Arenas and Laguna 

El Pobre with Laguna Kiani to mitigate the impacts of the existing dirt road; 3) Remove rock 

groins at the entrance channel to reduce coastal erosion at Playa Grande; 4) Evaluate the 

potential for re-establishing hydrology between the Puerto Ferro and Puerto Mosquito by 

replacement of a portion of the existing dirt road with a bridged section to allow water flow 

between the two areas; 5) Restore drainages from the Camp Garcia airstrip to Laguna Bahia 

de Corcho; 6) Remove excess sediments in upper areas of Bahia Tapon and eliminate trash 

heaps and excess trails to improve hydrology in the western area; 7) Remove rock armor and 

rip rap from the area south of the entrance of Laguna Bahia Chiva; 8) Restore hydrology in 

Laguna Puerto Diablo by placing a culvert or bridge across the historical opening, which is 

currently blocked by a road; 9) Restore hydrological connection to Laguna Anones to the sea 

at Bahia Salinas del Sur; 10) Restore hydrological connection to Laguna Icacos; and 11) 

Restore hydrology to Laguna Gato. Any restoration activities in areas potentially having 

unexploded ordnance will require coordination with the Navy to ensure no explosive hazard 

exists. 

y Review and adapt management practices after five years of monitoring to ensure that benefits 

to the habitats are maximized. 

Issue: Restoration of Forest Habitats 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop a specific plan for the long-term 

management of the mangrove forest/lagoon systems on the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Review existing studies and recommendations for mangrove forest restoration. 

y Determine baseline conditions and restoration goals by consulting with the Department of 

Natural and Environmental Resources and knowledgeable local citizens; 

y Evaluate aerial photographs and maps to determine the historical status of the mangrove 

areas. 

y Remove trash, scrap metal, concrete debris, and other items that have been deposited in 

various mangrove wetlands. Cleaned areas would be restored to surrounding elevations, 

when necessary, in order to allow the mangrove wetlands to adequately recolonize. The 

mangrove fringe at Bahia Playa Blanca has been identified as one of the sites in need of 

evaluation for potential restoration. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, survey existing forested habitat to establish 

baseline information and identify sites to be managed for increased species diversity and habitat 

use by native species. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 83

Strategies: 

y Establish management planning units for the development of the forest management 

component of the habitat management step-down plan scheduled for completion in 2008. 

y Designate at least 5 experimental restoration plots within the management units. 

y Monitor long-term success of experimental plots and application of adaptive management 

techniques. 

y Establish inventory/monitoring plots (e.g., Smithsonian long-term plots). 

y Incorporate information from vegetation and bird surveys and the monitoring plots into plan 

revisions. 

Issue: Fire Management 

Objective: Complete the fire management plan by 2008 (currently in draft) to define when, 

where, and how fire would be controlled and managed for habitat benefits and community safety. 

Strategies: 

y Identify and map firebreak locations to protect adjacent communities, consulting with the 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, fire department personnel, and the 

Environmental Quality Board regarding the potential use of prescribed fire to reduce wildfire 

hazards and to manage habitat. 

y Acquire by 2008, fire suppression equipment and supplies as identified in the fire 

management plan. 

Issue: Grasslands Management 

Objective: Maintain grassland habitats annually through an active management program to 

minimize invasion by woody species. 

Strategy: 

y Identify areas for cutting, haying, burning, and selective clearing as part of the habitat 

management plan to be completed by 2009 

Issue: Invasive/Exotic Plants 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, initiate a plan to control invasive and exotic 

species while restoring native species on a minimum of 25 acres annually. Invasive/exotic plants 

are one of the major factors affecting the native species and habitats of the refuge. 
84 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Strategies: 

y Monitor, biannually, to detect new populations of exotic or invasive species. 

y Evaluate the effectiveness of management techniques, such as prescribed burning, herbicide 

treatments, and selective and mechanical removal of mesquite and acacia. 

y Reintroduce native species where removal has been conducted. 

y Develop a public education program to reduce the potential for additional introductions. 

Issue: Feral Animal Control 

Objective: Feral animals are affecting both the habitats and the species found on the Vieques 

Refuge. Within three years of plan approval, initiate a program to control the feral animal 

population to prevent damage to native species and their habitats, and to eliminate conflicts with 

management programs and authorized public uses. 

Strategies: 

y Reduce the impacts of these animals by having owners (when identified) of horses, cattle, 

dogs, and cats remove their animals from the refuge. 

y Initiate an active program of trapping and removal of unclaimed feral horses, cattle, dogs, and 

cats. 

y Initiate surveys of mongoose and iguanas to determine their population levels and impacts on 

habitats and native species. Where feasible, control measures would be initiated to limit the 

expansion and impacts of these species. 

Issue: Research Cooperation 

Objective: Aggressively seek partnerships with universities and other research entities to 

develop proposals and conduct research needed to establish baseline data in order to develop 

effective wildlife management. 

Strategy: 

y Provide opportunities for wildlife research on the refuge to address resource and management 

needs, as part of a program to utilize the best science available. 

GOAL 2: Monitor, protect, and recover special status animals, plants, and species of management 

interest. 

Discussion: The management program for selected species of interest under the resource 

management alternative would be focused on monitoring, reducing potential threats, and conducting 

substantial habitat restoration activities. In addition to the activities identified in the “no action” 

alternative, major efforts would address threatened and endangered species currently found on the 

refuge, reintroduction of species formerly identified from Vieques, and management of habitats for 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 85

migratory birds. Expanded volunteer and cooperative research programs would be developed to 

assist with the implementation of intensive monitoring and management activities. 

Issue: Threatened and Endangered Species Management 

Objective: Monitor, protect, and enhance federally listed plant and animal species and their 

essential habitats within the refuge. Beaches on the refuge provide important nesting sites for 

hawksbill, leatherback, and green sea turtles. 

Strategies: 

y Ensure that refuge beaches are protected and that any changes in the populations or 

utilization of the beaches are detected. 

y Conduct an intensive program to document sea turtle activities to include: the monitoring of all 

accessible refuge beaches for nesting activities in cooperation with the Department of Natural 

and Environmental Resources, non-governmental organizations, universities, local schools, 

and the community; establishing a saturation tagging program at all beaches with “significant” 

nesting activities to determine the nesting population size; establishing an effective 

mechanism to protect sea turtle nests from poaching and other human-related disturbances 

(e.g., vehicles and lights); monitoring nest predation and establishing a predator control 

program, if needed; enhancing sea turtle nesting habitat through planting of native coastal 

vegetation; and evaluating the need to close important sea turtle beaches to recreational 

activities during peak nesting and hatching seasons. 

y Conduct routine patrols to determine the level of utilization and the need for management of 

roseate terns that frequent the refuge. 

y In cooperation and coordination with the Commonwealth DNER, evaluate food resources and 

habitat to identify potential reintroduction sites for the Yellow-shouldered Blackbird. 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, complete an inventory of all vascular and nonvascular plants with a specific emphasis on federal and commonwealth listed species. 

Strategies: 

y Complete surveys for threatened and endangered plants and evaluate the availability of 

habitat for these species. Because portions of the refuge are not accessible, this work has not 

been completed. Completion of these surveys would be the first component of the refuge’s 

threatened and endangered plant management program. 

y Collect voucher specimens of all species and obtain GPS locations for all federal or 

commonwealth listed plant species. 

y Initiate a cooperative program with other agencies and community members to collect seeds 

or vegetative material to establish a propagation program for plants. The propagated plants 

would be used to augment existing plant communities and establish new populations in 

accordance with species recovery plans. Expand populations of Stahlia monosperma and 

Goetzia elegans.
86 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Issue: Wading Bird, Waterfowl, and Shorebird Management

Objective: Evaluate and manage wading birds, waterfowl, and shorebirds to ensure the stability 

of their populations, to maintain the health of the populations, and to meet their habitat 

requirements. Management for wading birds, waterfowl, and shorebirds is closely associated 

with the management of lagoons and salt flats. 

Strategies: 

y Establish a long-term survey and monitoring program to develop baseline data on the species, 

utilizing the wetlands and salt flats for wintering, roosting, nesting, and feeding within the 

refuge to determine the relative importance and suitability of existing habitats for these 

species. 

y Conduct the monitoring program in conjunction with the Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources and provide information necessary to monitor population trends and 

develop management programs, if needed. 

Issue: Sea Bird Management

Objective: Evaluate and manage sea birds to ensure the stability of their populations, to 

maintain the health of the populations, and to meet their habitat requirements. There is currently 

a limited amount of information on the utilization of the refuge by sea birds. 

Strategy: 

y Conduct surveys as a primary focus of the management program for these species to obtain 

baseline data and to monitor the populations of sea birds on the coastal areas of the refuge. 

Through the data obtained, the refuge would have a basis to identify, manage, and protect 

feeding, mating, roosting, and nesting habitats used by sea birds. This program would ensure 

that the refuge management activities and human disturbances would not interfere with 

nesting and other activities of resident and migratory sea bird species. 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, identify cliff habitats utilized for nesting by sea 

birds. 

Strategy: 

y Initiate an inventory of cliff habitats that may be used by several species of sea birds, 

especially on eastern refuge lands, in order to identify nesting habitat. 

Issue: Other Birds 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, develop a formal plan for conducting surveys and 

banding programs for resident and migratory birds. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 87

Strategy: 

y Continue the limited banding program utilizing mist nets in the summer and winter. This 

program would be expanded to obtain data and band upland birds at least four times per year. 

The expanded program would include sites on both east and west Vieques and would 

incorporate cooperators (e.g., Department of Natural and Environmental Resources and nongovernmental organizations) into the banding program. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, establish survey routes within subtropical moist 

and dry forests to track population trends of key species (e.g., white-crowned pigeon and 

Adelaide’s warbler) in these habitats. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to coordinate surveys of white-crowned pigeons with the Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources and expand survey efforts to identify critical nesting and feeding 

areas for this species. Data gathered from the surveys would be used to develop forest 

habitat management recommendations for the forest management component of the habitat 

management step-down plan. 

Issue: Amphibians and Reptiles Management 

Objective: Conduct surveys to confirm the presence or absence of reported reptiles and 

amphibians on refuge lands. Aside from the sea turtles, information on other reptiles and 

amphibians on the refuge is limited. 

Strategies: 

y Establish transects or study plots to provide both qualitative and quantitative data on the 

abundance and distribution of amphibians and reptiles. 

y Encourage university and high school student participation in the surveys and conservation of 

these species. 

Issue: Mammals Management 

Objective: Conduct surveys to determine the population status of bat species on refuge lands. 

The only native land mammals on Vieques are bats. A few species have been identified and 

others are expected to occur on the refuge, but have yet to be confirmed. 

Strategies: 

y Conduct mist netting twice a year to determine the presence and relative abundance of the 

bat species on the refuge. 

y Promote bat research and management studies by university researchers and students. 

y Incorporate management recommendations in conjunction with these studies into species and 

habitat management plans scheduled for development in 2009. 
88 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Issue: Fishery Management 

Objective: By 2008, in conjunction with the Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources, develop a fishery resource plan to aid in establishing management programs and 

fishing regulations for refuge lagoon systems. Fishery resources are under the primary 

jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Department of Natural and Environmental Resources. 

Strategies: 

y Work closely with the commonwealth to provide information to the public and to enforce 

commonwealth fishing regulations. 

y Survey fish species in Kiani and Playa Grande Lagoons and assess the size, abundance, and 

sustainability of the populations. 

y Provide information from these studies to the Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources for use in developing commonwealth regulations. 

Issue: Invertebrates 

Objective: Determine the abundance and composition of terrestrial and aquatic macro 

invertebrates on refuge lands. Very limited information is available on the invertebrate species 

located on the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Develop a characterization of the macro invertebrate fauna of Laguna Playa Grande and 

Laguna Kiani, with the assistance of cooperating researchers, to initiate a database from 

which future studies may be generated. 

y Focus additional studies on mangroves, subtropical dry forests, and subtropical moist forest 

types. 

y Investigate terrestrial species with an emphasis on the search for an endemic land snail 

(Pseudopineria viequense), which is referenced in historical records. 

GOAL 3: Provide opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation and education and other compatible 

uses to enhance public appreciation, understanding, and enjoyment of the refuge’s wildlife, habitats, 

and cultural history. 

Discussion: Public use on the western and eastern refuge lands would continue to occur primarily at 

Playa Arenas (Green Beach), de la Chiva (Blue Beach), and Caracas (Red Beach). As in Alternative 

A, the currently available facilities, roadways, beach shelters, and boardwalk trail at Kiani Lagoon 

would be maintained and, in addition, a new Visitor Contact Station would be developed in 

conjunction with an office maintenance complex in the vicinity of Camp Garcia. Wildlife-dependent 

recreational activities, as identified in the Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, would be given 

priority consideration over other uses. These activities are hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, 

wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 89

Issue: Recreational Beach Activities

Objective: Within five years of plan approval, manage compatible recreational activities at high 

public use beaches on the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to monitor and maintain the existing recreational activities and facilities at Playas 

Arenas (Green Beach), La Chiva (Blue Beach), and Caracas (Red Beach). 

y Consult with commonwealth agencies (e.g., Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources and Compaña de Parques Nacionales) regarding the potential of a cooperative 

agreement for the management of the high public use beach recreation areas. 

y Install composting toilet at high public use beach locations, in cooperation with the appropriate 

commonwealth agencies. 

Issue: Public Access 

Objective: Where safe and practical, provide public access to refuge sites for wildlife-dependent 

and compatible non-wildlife-dependent activities to address community needs. General public 

access has traditionally been permitted to beach areas where it is safe to conduct recreational 

activities. 

Strategy: 

y Permit access to open areas from dawn to dusk to accommodate a majority of the traditional 

uses. 

Issue: Collection of Sea Grapes and Coconuts 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, establish guidelines and officially open designated 

portions of the refuge for collection of sea grapes and coconuts for personal consumption. 

Historic use of the coastal portions of the refuge lands includes the collection of sea grapes and 

coconuts. 

Strategies: 

y Ensure protection of the resources by assessing historic uses and potential impacts of 

removal of sea grapes and coconuts. 

y Identify areas that are appropriate for harvest of these resources and any regulations that are 

necessary to ensure the resources are protected for the future. 

y Develop a Federal Register notice to officially open selected areas for harvest and establish 

any necessary regulations. 
90 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Issue: Fishing 

Objective: Evaluate the need and demand for fishing opportunities at a variety of locations on 

the refuge. Fishing is a traditional activity along the refuge beaches and in the lagoons. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to permit fishing during daylight hours in the open areas of the refuge. 

y Conduct an experimental special use permit program for night fishing. This program would be 

used to evaluate the demand, potential impacts, and compatibility of night fishing on the 

refuge. 

y Continue to permit access to sites with historic use as launch ramps for fishing access during 

open hours. 

y Provide fishery information and regulations at fishing access points throughout the refuge. 

y Conduct inventories of lagoon fisheries resources to determine potential for use and need for 

regulation of uses. 

y Develop a fishing brochure to provide information and describe regulation and conditions of 

permits in cooperation with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources; 

y Repair or replace the fishing platform at Laguna Kiani. 

Issue: Hunting 

Discussion: Hunting for doves, pigeons, and waterfowl is wildlife-dependent recreation that might be 

appropriate on the refuge if it is compatible with other uses and does not conflict with the purposes of 

the refuge. Since white-crowned pigeon populations are very low, this species would be excluded 

from any potential hunting program and hunting would not be permitted in areas where they are 

known or expected to occur. 

 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, complete an evaluation of potential target 

species and habitats to determine if a hunting program is feasible. 

Strategies: 

y Determine if populations of doves, pigeons, and waterfowl are adequate to be considered for 

inclusion in a hunting program by cooperating with the Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources to conduct population and reproduction surveys of these species. 

y Develop a hunting plan by 2010, if a determination is made that a hunting program is 

sustainable and appropriate. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 91

Issue: Land Crabbing 

Discussion: Capture of land crabs is a traditional activity that may be appropriate where it is 

sustainable and can be conducted without long-term impacts on the crabs or other resources. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, complete a formal evaluation of the opportunities 

for land crabbing on both the eastern and western refuge lands. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to conduct an experimental land crab trapping program at designated sites on the 

eastern refuge. Utilize information from the experimental program to monitor populations and 

reproduction of land crabs in order to determine their status and the potential for sustainable 

harvests. If sustainable, a formal program would be incorporated as part of the public use 

management plan scheduled for completion in 2009. 

y Cooperate with an ongoing National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration study of 

contamination in land crabs to determine advisability of human consumption of crabs from 

different areas of the refuge. 

Issue: Interpretive Programs 

Objective: Provide and enhance non-personal and personal interpretive media and programs 

that increase awareness and understanding of the refuge’s natural and cultural resources. 

Discussion: The refuge currently provides a very limited interpretive program. Under this alternative, 

the refuge would continue a limited interpretive program. 

Issue: Environmental Education Programs 

Objective: Provide and enhance environmental education. 

Strategies: 

y Develop a multi-faceted, curriculum-based program for use on and off the refuge to enhance 

public awareness and understanding of the refuge’s resources and to inspire action among 

local, national, and international educational groups on behalf of the refuge and Vieques 

Island. 

y Continue to conduct limited environmental education programs for Vieques school groups and 

other educational institutions of Puerto Rico. 

Issue: Camping 

Discussion: Camping has historically been a recreational activity on Vieques beaches, especially 

during the Easter season. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, determine if and when camping could be permitted 

on the refuge. 
92 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Strategies: 

y Consider camping associated with environmental education activities and evaluate potential 

sites for this activity. 

y Issue special use permits, if camping is deemed appropriate in association with organized 

environmental education activities. 

Issue: Commercial Activities 

Discussion: Commercial activities, such as rental of kayaks, beach umbrellas, sales of food or drinks, 

and providing guide services, have been proposed as potential benefits to visitors and as an 

economic benefit to the local community. 

Objective: Within five years of plan approval, complete necessary evaluations to identify and 

implement appropriate and compatible commercial or concession activities. 

Strategy: 

y Evaluate the potential for permitting commercial wildlife-dependent tours and activities in 

compliance with commonwealth and federal requirements. Commercial activities associated 

with non-wildlife-dependent activities would not be considered. 

Issue: Interpretation and Conservation of Historical and Archaeological Sites 

Discussion: The refuge would comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 

and/or any other pertinent historic preservation mandates prior to initiation of any undertaking or 

habitat management activity. Historical and archaeological sites on the refuge would receive a 

minimum level of maintenance and management. Several sites on the refuge are significant to the 

understanding of local and regional historic and prehistoric cultures. 

Objective: Within four years of plan approval, provide interpretive signing, information and 

appropriate conservation of historical and archaeological sites on refuge lands. 

Issue: Law Enforcement 

Discussion: To protect the wildlife resources and maintain visitor safety, an effective law enforcement 

program is an important component of the overall refuge management. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop an effective cooperative law enforcement 

program with commonwealth agencies to address illegal activities on refuge lands. 

Strategies: 

y Continue the current refuge law enforcement program to ensure staff are trained, equipped, 

and scheduled to provide adequate security for visitors and refuge personnel. 

y Cooperate with commonwealth law enforcement agencies to provide additional enforcement 

presence on refuge lands. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 93

GOAL 4: Through cooperative efforts with partners, ensure that the refuge is cleaned of all classes 

of contaminants that could pose a threat to the health and safety of the wildlife, residents, staff, and 

visitors. 

Discussion: Effective natural resource management, wildlife-dependent recreational uses, and other 

potential future uses of the refuge cannot be realized without a comprehensive clean-up of 

unexploded ordnance and other contaminants that remain from prior uses of the lands. Current 

efforts under the provisions of CERCLA are being carried out to address the contaminants issues on 

the areas currently being managed as the refuge. Clean-up activities would likely continue beyond 

the timeframe of this agreement. 

Issue: Wildlife and Human Exposure to Contaminants and Explosives 

Objective: Throughout the clean-up process, ensure that the threats and impacts from 

contaminants, unexploded ordnance, munitions and explosives of concern, or explosive 

constituents to nearby communities, visitors, wildlife, and employees are removed to the greatest 

degree possible. Assure that clean-up standards protective of wildlife, plants, and habitats are 

met. 

Strategies: 

y Participate with the Navy, Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Quality Board, 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, and community representatives during 

the development of documents and clean-up plans for all former Navy lands. 

y Coordinate the development of refuge management plans with the above agencies to ensure 

that clean-up addresses the needs of the resources and visitors to the refuge. 

Objective: Ensure that refuge resources are adequately protected during the clean-up process. 

Strategy: 

y Ensure a clear role in the clean-up process by participating in the development and 

implementation of the Federal Facilities Agreement that identifies roles and guides the 

agencies during the clean-up. 

GOAL 5: Provide the resources needed to implement the selected management alternative. 

Discussion: Effectively managing wildlife, habitat, and public uses, as well as conducting other 

resource management activities, requires personnel, equipment, and facilities. The levels of staffing 

and facilities necessary for each alternative are dependent on the proposed activities and programs. 

In accordance with the legislation transferring administration of the Vieques lands to the Department 

of the Interior, the area formerly identified as the Live Impact Area would be managed as a 

“Wilderness Area” with no public access permitted. 

Issue: Equipment Needs 

Objective: Annually evaluate needs and submit funding requests to acquire and maintain 

equipment necessary to perform identified management activities 
94 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Strategy: 

y Develop and maintain Refuge Operation Needs System (RONS) and Service Asset 

Maintenance Management System (SAMMS) project lists and equipment needs. These 

programs provide the mechanism to identify needs and request funding for essential facilities, 

services, equipment, and management activities. 

Issue: Facilities Needs 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, formalize plans and funding proposals for visitor 

contact facilities, interpretive displays, and office space to accommodate visitor and staff needs. 

All new facilities proposed will comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (1992) and the 

Architectural Barriers Act (1968). 

Strategies: 

y Develop new facilities to provide a combined visitor contact station and refuge office in the 

vicinity of Camp Garcia on eastern Vieques refuge lands. 

y Maintain informational kiosk adjacent to the Kiani Lagoon boardwalk on western Vieques. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop plans and funding proposals for 

maintenance facilities. 

Strategy: 

y Develop plans for additional maintenance facilities and upgrade and maintain the existing 

facilities at the Camp Garcia site. 

Objective: Provide meeting and laboratory space for researchers conducting biological, 

archaeological, or historical investigation to benefit refuge management activities. 

Strategy: 

y Ensure that adequate facilities are available for researchers by evaluating the potential of 

using existing structures or additional space developed in conjunction with the proposed 

visitor contact station and office in the vicinity of Camp Garcia. 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, provide hiking trails for access to selected sites 

for wildlife-dependent public uses. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to permit access to recreational sites at Playa La Chiva and Playa Caracas. Close 

other roads in the conservation management areas to vehicular access in order to minimize 

potential impacts from public uses. 

y Designate selected roads and trails within these areas for access by foot and non-motorized 

conveyance. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 95

Objective: Provide adequate parking for refuge visitors while minimizing impacts on the natural 

resources. 

Discussion: At the present time, parking at the beach recreation areas is not organized and visitors 

are permitted to use any open space for parking. This results in greater impacts than would occur 

with an organized system of parking sites. 

Strategy: 

y Organize and reduce the number of roadways associated with parking at Playas Caracas, La 

Chiva, and Punta Arenas to minimize the areas impacted, but still maintain the current level of 

access. 

Issue: Real Property Management 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, evaluate potential alternatives for land disposal 

and acquisition. 

Discussion: As noted in other sections of this plan, the only land that the Service has authority to 

dispose of is the 98-acre parcel referred to as “Parcel C.” Regulations require that the Service 

receive lands of comparable value for any lands transferred out of the Refuge System. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, evaluate potential alternatives for land disposal 

and acquisition. 

Strategy: 

y Continue coordination efforts with the commonwealth and municipality to develop a plan for 

the exchange of “Parcel C” to meet community needs and comply with Service requirements. 

Issue: Staffing Needs 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, provide both permanent and temporary staff 

needed to accomplish the goals identified under the selected alternative. 

Strategy: 

y Add twenty-one positions to the refuge to fully implement this plan (Figure 18). These 

positions include biological, fire management, and support staff needed to focus on wildlife 

management while maintaining current levels of public use. 
96 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 18. Organization of personnel under Alternative B 

Refuge Manager 

GS 12-13 

Refuge 

Biologist 

GS 9-11 

Administrative 

Officer 

GS 6-7-9 

Maintenance Leader

WL 9-10 

Refuge Law 

Enforcement 

GS 11 

Oureach 

Coordinator 

GS 9-11 

Refuge Biologist 

GS 7-9 

Biological 

Technician 

GS 5-6-7 

Biological 

Technician 

GS 5-6-7 

Secretary 

GS 5-6 

IT Specialist 

GS 7-9 

Maintenance 

Worker 

 WG 7-9 

Maintenance 

Worker 

 WG 3-5-7 

Fire Management 

Officer 

GS 5-7-9 

Fire Management 

Officer 

GS 5-7-9 

Refuge Law 

Enforcement 

GS 5-7-9 

Refuge Law 

Enforcement 

GS 5-7-9 

Refuge Law 

Enforcement 

GS 5-7-9 

Park Ranger 

GS 5-7

Outreach Specialist

GS 7-9 

Maintenance 

Worker 

WG 3-5-7 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 97

Issue: Use of Volunteers 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, develop a formal refuge policy to incorporate 

volunteers as a routine component of the refuge management program. 

Strategy: 

y Develop a refuge policy and increase outreach to potential volunteers to assist with an 

expanded biological monitoring program and refuge management activities. Volunteers would 

be essential to the completion of intensive surveys and monitoring programs and would 

facilitate the maintenance of public recreational activities that would otherwise be a lower 

priority. 

GOAL 6: Develop effective and open means of communication with Vieques citizens, interested 

groups, and organizations to raise public awareness of refuge programs, management decisions, and 

the mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

Issue: External Communications 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop and implement a formal outreach plan to 

ensure community awareness of refuge programs and activities. 

Strategy: 

y Continue with ongoing communication techniques through news releases, flyers, and 

meetings with organized groups and individuals. 

ALTERNATIVE C (HABITAT AND PUBLIC USE EMPHASIS) 

(PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE) 

MANAGEMENT FOCUS 

The primary focus of the management program identified in this alternative is to provide a realistic 

and achievable level of both habitat management and public use. Implementation of this alternative 

would necessitate increased staff and development of additional facilities on the refuge. In addition to 

the activities and facilities that are included in Alternative A, this alternative proposes the 

development of a new office/maintenance/visitor center complex in the vicinity of Camp Garcia, 

additional trail development on both eastern and western refuge lands, a proactive approach to 

management and interpretation of historical and archaeological sites, and expansion of the areas 

opened to public uses. This alternative also provides for increases in management efforts to restore 

refuge habitats, recover threatened and endangered species, and expand priority public uses. Other 

uses may be permitted when they are both appropriate and compatible. 

Some strategies proposed in this alternative are also included in Alternatives A and B. To facilitate a 

clearer understanding of the proposed action and to eliminate the need for referencing other sections 

of this document, a description of the proposed actions is included, even when they are the same as 

described in the other alternatives. 
98 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

GOAL 1: (HABITAT) Conserve, enhance, and restore native plant communities and wetland habitats 

and their associated fish, wildlife, and plants, representative of the native biological diversity that 

would have been found on Vieques Refuge lands prior to major agricultural and military use of the 

lands. 

Issue: Restore Lagoon Hydrology 

Objective: Conduct annual evaluations and manage lagoon openings to improve habitat and 

wildlife utilization. 

Strategies: 

y Provide for an intensive wildlife management program that would involve the development of a 

monitoring program to assess current conditions and the effects of opening lagoons on the 

associated habitats. Information from the monitoring program would be used to identify the 

highest priority lagoon system for management and restoration. 

y Conduct hydrologic studies to assess whether or not restoration actions are necessary to 

maximize the productivity of Kiani Lagoon. Since primary jurisdiction over tidal waters is 

normally with the commonwealth, all proposed actions involving the opening of lagoons or 

other habitat restoration activities in or adjacent to commonwealth waters would be closely 

coordinated with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources. 

y Obtain any appropriate permits and open two to four lagoons each year to permit tidal 

flushing, after evaluation and determination that opening of the lagoons is appropriate and 

beneficial to the refuge. Follow-up studies would be conducted at these sites to maintain 

openings and monitor habitat and species utilization changes. Specific projects that have 

been identified to aid in restoring lagoon hydrology include the following: 1) Remove the rock 

groin at the mouth of Laguna Boca Quebrada. Monitor the area to determine if additional work 

is needed; 2) Construct connections to provide circulation between Laguna Arenas and 

Laguna El Pobre with Laguna Kiani to mitigate the impacts of the existing dirt road; 3) 

Remove rock groins at the entrance channel to reduce coastal erosion at Playa Grande; 4) 

Evaluate the potential for re-establishing hydrology between the Puerto Ferro and Puerto 

Mosquito by replacement of a portion of the existing dirt road with a bridged section to allow 

water flow between the two areas; 5) Restore drainages from the Camp Garcia airstrip to 

Laguna Bahia de Corcho 6) Remove excess sediments in upper areas of Bahia Tapon and 

eliminate trash heaps and excess trails to improve hydrology in the western area; 7) Remove 

rock armor and rip rap from the area south of the entrance of Laguna Bahia Chiva; 8) Restore 

hydrology in Laguna Puerto Diablo by placing culvert or bridge across historical opening, 

which is currently blocked by a road; 9) Restore hydrological connection to Laguna Anones to 

the sea at Bahia Salinas del Sur; 10) Restore hydrological connection to Laguna Icacos; and 

11) Restore hydrology to Laguna Gato. Any restoration activities in areas potentially having 

unexploded ordnance will require coordination with the Navy to ensure no explosive hazard 

exists. 

y Review and adapt management practices after 5 years of monitoring to ensure benefits to the 

habitats are maximized. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 99

Issue: Restoration of Forest Habitats 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop a specific plan for the long-term 

management of the mangrove forest/lagoon systems on the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Consult with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources and knowledgeable 

local citizens to determine baseline conditions and restoration goals. 

y Evaluate aerial photographs and maps to determine the historical status of the mangrove 

areas. This strategy is closely related to the restoration of lagoon hydrology and would 

involve the review of existing studies and recommendations for mangrove forest restoration. 

y Remove trash, scrap metal, concrete debris, and other items that have been deposited in 

various mangrove wetlands. Cleaned areas would be restored to surrounding elevations, 

when necessary, in order to allow the mangrove wetlands to adequately recolonize. The 

mangrove fringe at Bahia Playa Blanca has been identified as one of the sites in need of 

evaluation for potential restoration. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, survey existing forested habitat to establish 

baseline information and identify sites to be managed for increased species diversity and habitat 

use by native species. 

Strategy: 

y Establish management planning units for the development of the forest management 

component of the habitat management step-down plan scheduled for completion in 2008. The 

forest management component will include: 1) designating experimental restoration plots 

within the management units; 2) monitoring long-term success of experimental plots and 

application of adaptive management techniques; 3) establishing inventory/monitoring plots 

(e.g. Smithsonian long-term plots); and 4) incorporating information from vegetation and bird 

surveys and the monitoring plots into plan revisions. The numbers of experimental plots and 

their sizes would be determined by available resources, cooperating research activities, and 

availability of volunteers to conduct monitoring activities. 

Issue: Fire Management 

Objective: Complete a fire management plan by 2008 (currently in draft) to define when, where, 

and how fire would be controlled and managed for habitat benefits and community safety. 

Strategies: 

y Identify and map firebreak locations to protect adjacent communities, consulting with the 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, fire department personnel, and the 

Environmental Quality Board regarding the potential use of prescribed fire to reduce wildfire 

hazards and to manage habitat. 

y Acquire by 2008, fire suppression equipment and supplies as identified in the fire 

management plan, and fully implement the fire management and suppression program. 
100 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Issue: Grasslands Management 

Objective: Maintain grassland habitats annually through an active management program to 

minimize invasion by woody species. 

Strategy: 

y Identify areas to be managed for grassland habitats, as part of the habitat management plan 

to be prepared by 2009, and maintain areas through an active program of cutting, haying, 

burning, and selective clearing. 

Issue: Invasive/Exotic Plants 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, initiate a plan to control invasive and exotic 

species while restoring native species on a minimum of 25 acres annually. Invasive/exotic plants 

are a major factor affecting the native species and habitats of the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Monitor, biannually, to detect new populations of exotic or invasive species. 

y Evaluate the effectiveness of management techniques, such as prescribed burning, herbicide 

treatments, and selective and mechanical removal of mesquite and acacia. 

y Reintroduce native species where removal has been conducted. 

y Develop a public education program to reduce the potential for additional introductions. 

Issue: Feral Animal Control 

Objective: Feral animals on the refuge are affecting both the habitats and the species found on 

the Vieques Refuge. Within three years of plan approval, initiate a program to control the feral 

animal population to prevent damage to native species and their habitats, and to eliminate 

conflicts with management programs and authorized public uses. 

Strategies: 

y Reduce the impacts of these animals by having owners (when identified) of horses, cattle, 

dogs, and cats remove their animals from the refuge. 

y Initiate an active program of trapping and removal of unclaimed feral horses, cattle, dogs, and 

cats. 

y Initiate surveys of mongoose and iguanas to determine their population levels and impacts on 

habitats and native species. Where feasible, control measures would be initiated to limit the 

expansion and impacts of these species. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 101

Issue: Research Cooperation 

Objective: Aggressively seek partnerships with universities and other research entities to 

develop proposals and conduct research needed to establish baseline data in order to develop 

effective wildlife management programs. 

Strategy: 

y Provide opportunities for wildlife research on the refuge to address resource and management 

needs, as part of a program to utilize the best science available. 

GOAL 2: Monitor, protect, and recover special status plants and animals and species of 

management interest. 

Issue: Threatened and Endangered Species Management 

Objective: Monitor, protect, and enhance federally listed plant and animal species and their 

essential habitats within the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Ensure that refuge beaches are protected and that any changes in the populations of 

Hawksbill, Leatherback, and Green Sea Turtles or their utilization of the beaches are 

detected. 

y Conduct an intensive program to document sea turtle activities to include: the monitoring of all 

accessible refuge beaches for nesting activities in cooperation with the Department of Natural 

and Environmental Resources, non-governmental organizations, universities, local schools, 

and the community; establishing a saturation tagging program at all beaches with “significant” 

nesting activities to determine the nesting population size; establishing an effective 

mechanism to protect sea turtle nests from poaching and other human-related disturbances 

(e.g., vehicles and lights); monitoring nest predation and establishing a predator control 

program, if needed; enhancing sea turtle nesting habitat through planting of native coastal 

vegetation; and developing an outreach education program focused on sea turtle conservation 

measures. 

y Conduct routine patrols to determine if Roseate Terns are nesting or foraging on the refuge. 

When found, implement measures to ensure human disturbance to the colonies is avoided. 

y In cooperation and coordination with the Commonwealth DNER, evaluate food resources and 

habitat to identify potential reintroduction sites for the Yellow-shouldered Blackbird. 

y Ensure the protection and continued success of the brown pelican nesting colony on Cayo 

Conejo, which is under the primary jurisdiction of the Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources. Assist the Department in the development of management plans, 

protection of habitat, and monitoring of pelican use on Cayo Conejo. 
102 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

y Conduct studies to determine if the Virgin Islands tree boa is present on the refuge. Although 

there have been reports of snakes on Vieques and the refuge lands, the presence of a 

reproducing population of the boa has not been determined. 

y Cooperate with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, university 

personnel, and others conducting research and management studies related to manatee 

movements and marine mammal stranding events. The cooperative “Management Plan for 

the Western Vieques Conservation Areas,” prepared by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 

the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, and the Department of the Interior, identifies the 

northwest seagrass beds as important habitat for manatees. 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, complete an inventory of all vascular and nonvascular plants with a specific emphasis on federal- and commonwealth-listed species. 

Discussion: Surveys for threatened and endangered plants and evaluation of the available habitat for 

these species have been initiated; however, because portions of the refuge are not accessible, this 

work has not been completed. Continuation and completion of these surveys would be the first 

component of the refuge’s threatened and endangered plant management program. 

Strategies: 

y Collect voucher specimens of all species and obtain GPS locations for all federal- or 

commonwealth-listed plant species as a part of this program. 

y Initiate a cooperative program with other agencies and community members to collect seeds 

or vegetative material to establish a propagation program for plants. The propagated plants 

would be used to augment existing plant communities and establish new populations in 

accordance with species recovery plans. 

y Work with commonwealth agencies and non-governmental organizations to promote studies 

and develop recovery actions for federal- or commonwealth-listed plants on refuge lands. 

Issue: Wading Bird, Waterfowl, and Shorebird Management

Objective: Evaluate and manage wading birds, waterfowl, and shorebirds to ensure the stability 

of their populations, to maintain the health of the populations, and to meet their habitat 

requirements. Management of these species is closely associated with the management of 

lagoons and salf flats. Survey and monitoring data would be incorporated into habitat, fish, and 

wildlife population management step-down plans scheduled for completion in 2008. 

Strategies: 

y Determine the relative importance and suitability of existing habitats for these species by 

establishing a long-term survey and monitoring program to develop baseline data. Conduct 

program in conjunction with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources and 

provide information necessary to monitor population trends and develop management 

programs, if needed. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 103

y Utilize information from the surveys to evaluate the feasibility of opening and conducting a 

yearly waterfowl hunting season within selected areas of the refuge. In addition to the surveys 

and habitat monitoring of these species, public uses and other resource management 

activities would be controlled to ensure maintenance of the species and their habitats. 

y Coordinate with the commonwealth, ornithological societies, other agencies, and nongovernmental organizations to facilitate collection of complete census data. 

Issue: Sea Bird Management

Objective: Evaluate and manage sea birds to ensure the stability of their populations, to 

maintain the health of the populations, and to meet their habitat requirements. Survey and 

monitoring data would be incorporated into habitat, fish, and wildlife population management 

step-down plans scheduled for completion in 2008. There is currently a limited amount of 

information on the utilization of the refuge by sea birds. 

Strategies: 

y Conduct surveys as a primary focus of the management program for these species to obtain 

baseline data and monitor the populations of sea birds on the coastal areas of the refuge. 

Through the data obtained, the refuge would have a basis to identify, manage, and protect 

feeding, mating, roosting, and nesting habitats used by sea birds. This program would ensure 

that the refuge management activities and human disturbances would not interfere with 

nesting and other activities of resident and migratory sea bird species. 

y Coordinate with the commonwealth, ornithological societies, other agencies, and nongovernmental organizations to facilitate collection of complete census data. 

Issue: Other Birds 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, develop a formal plan for conducting surveys and 

banding programs for resident and migratory birds. 

Strategy: 

y Continue the limited banding program utilizing mist nets in the summer and winter. This 

program would be expanded to obtain data and band upland birds at least four times per year. 

The expanded program would include sites on both east and west Vieques and would 

incorporate the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources and non-governmental 

organizations in the banding program. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, establish survey routes within subtropical moist 

and dry forests to track population trends of key species (e.g., white-crowned pigeon and 

Adelaide’s warbler) in these habitats. 
104 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Strategies: 

y Establish seasonal surveys for shorebirds along with monthly surveys for waterfowl and land 

birds. These surveys would be developed using transects and techniques that can be 

repeated. 

y Continue to coordinate surveys of the white-crowned pigeon with the Department of Natural 

and Environmental Resources and expand survey efforts to identify critical nesting and 

feeding areas for this species. Data gathered from the surveys would be used to develop 

forest habitat management recommendations for the forest management component of the 

habitat management step-down plan. 

Issue: Amphibians and Reptiles Management 

Objective: Conduct surveys to confirm the presence or absence of reported amphibians and 

reptiles on refuge lands. Aside from sea turtles, information on other reptiles and amphibians on 

the refuge is limited. 

Strategies: 

y Establish transects or study plots to provide both qualitative and quantitative data on the 

abundance and distribution of amphibians and reptiles. 

y Encourage university and high school student participation in the surveys and conservation of 

these species. 

Issue: Mammals Management 

Objective: Conduct surveys to determine the population status of bat species on refuge lands. 

The only native land mammals on Vieques are bats. A few species have been identified and 

others are expected to occur on the refuge, but have not yet been confirmed. 

Strategies: 

y Conduct mist netting twice a year to determine the presence and relative abundance of bat 

species on the refuge. 

y Promote bat research and management studies by university researchers and students. 

y Incorporate management recommendations in conjunction with these studies into species and 

habitat management plans scheduled for development in 2009. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 105

Issue: Fishery Management 

Objective: By 2008, in conjunction with the Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources, develop a fishery resource plan to aid in establishing management programs and 

fishing regulations for refuge lagoon systems. Fishery resources are under the primary 

jurisdiction of the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources. 

Strategies: 

y Work closely with the commonwealth to provide information to the public and to enforce 

commonwealth fishing regulations. 

y Conduct surveys of Kiani and Playa Grande Lagoons to assess the size, abundance, and 

sustainability of fish populations. 

y Provide information from the studies to the Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources for its use in developing regulations. 

Issue: Invertebrates 

Objective: Determine the abundance and composition of terrestrial and aquatic macroinvertebrates on refuge lands. Very limited information is available on the invertebrate species 

located on the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Conduct, along with cooperating researchers, a macro-invertebrate survey on refuge lands 

that would focus on mangroves, subtropical dry forests, and subtropical moist forest types to 

form a database from which future studies may be generated. 

y Investigate terrestrial species with an emphasis on the search for an endemic land snail 

(Pseudopineria viequense), which is referenced in historical records. 

GOAL 3: Provide opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation and education and other compatible 

uses to enhance public appreciation, understanding, and enjoyment of the refuge’s wildlife, habitats, 

and cultural history. 

Discussion: This alternative provides for an increase in the public uses of the refuge while remaining 

consistent with the management policies of the Fish and Wildlife Service. As with each of the 

alternatives proposed for managing the refuge, access and authorized activities are currently limited 

due to the potential hazards from previous military activities, and are contingent on the certification 

that the sites are safe for use. 
106 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Issue: Recreational Beach Activities 

Objective: Within five years of plan approval, develop an agreement with an appropriate entity to 

manage compatible recreational activities at high public use beaches on the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to monitor and maintain existing recreational activities and facilities at Playas Arenas 

(Green Beach), La Chiva (Blue Beach), and Caracas (Red Beach). 

y Continue efforts to consult with commonwealth agencies regarding the potential of a 

cooperative agreement for the management of the high public use beach recreation areas. 

y Install composting toilets at high public use beach locations in cooperation with the 

appropriate commonwealth agencies. 

Issue: Public Access 

Objective: Where safe and practical, provide public access to refuge sites for wildlife-dependent 

and compatible non-wildlife-dependent activities to address community needs. 

Strategies: 

y Facilitate compatible wildlife-dependent recreational activities by making accessible portions 

of the refuge open 24 hours per day for certain activities (Figures 19 and 20). 

y Maintain public access on roads currently opened and provide access to selected sites on the 

northeast portion of the refuge, once the routes and beaches are cleared of potential hazards 

(Figure 21). 

y Coordinate the process of clearing these areas of potential hazards in accordance with the 

Federal Facilities Agreement that is currently being developed by the Environmental 

Protection Agency, the Navy, the Environmental Quality Board, and the Department of the 

Interior. 

y Develop a system for monitoring the current use of the refuge in order to accommodate the 

uses, while ensuring the protection of the resources. 

y Conduct a carrying-capacity study within the next five years to determine the maximum 

number of visitors who could use the high public use areas without adversely affecting the 

resources or the experience of other visitors. In conjunction with the carrying-capacity study, 

an evaluation of visitor satisfaction and use patterns would be developed. Incorporate the 

results of this study into the public use management plan. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 107

Figure 19. Proposed alternative public uses (west) 

8 5j

8

8 Monte Pirata

Cerro El Buey

0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles

0 0.5 1

Playa 

μ

0.25 Kilometers

Punta Arenas

(Green Beach)

301 m

987 ft

Punta Vaca

ROTHR

Site

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustROTHRLagoonsVieques National Wildlife Refuge Boundary10 meter contour

RoadsProposed Scenic Road

Beach UseBiking Trail

Hiking TrailHistoric Interpretive SiteInterpretive Trail

Observation TowerParking AreaRest Area

Visitor Information KioskLookout Area, BinocularsScenic View

Walking Trail

8 Bridge, Foot Bridge

Punta Arenas

Punta Boca 

Quebrada

Playa 

Grande

Laguna

Boca Quebrada

Laguna

Playa Grande

Laguna

Kiani

Laguna

Punta Arenas Laguna El Pobre
108 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 20. Proposed alternative public uses (east) 5j

μ 012 0.5 Miles

012 0.5 Kilometers

Puerto 

Ferro

Playa Caracas

(Red Beach)

Playa La Chiva

(Blue Beach)

Isla Chiva

Berdiales

Bahía 

Tapón

Camp Garcia

Punta 

Conejo

Cayo 

Yanuel

Ensenada Honda

Bahía Fanduca

Bahía Jolova

Playa Matías

(Yellow Beach) Cayo

Conejo

Roca

Alcatraz

Bahia Salina 

del Sur

Tamarindo

Sur

Punta

Este

Playa

Blanca

Punta

Salinas

Playa 

Brava

Bahia 

Icacos

Isla

Yallis

Puerto 

Diablo

Punta 

Brigadier Punta 

Goleta Puerto Negro

Punta 

Campanilla

Vieques National Wildlife RefugeMunicipality of ViequesPR Conservation TrustVieques National Wildlife Refuge BoundaryLagoons10 meter contourProposed Hiking/Biking Interpretive Trail

Management Access RoadsManagement Access Roads (former LIA)Vehicle Public Road OpenVehicle Public Use Proposed

Refuge EntranceFishermen’s Launch Facilities

Reforestation AreaFishing AccessKayakingSeasonal Beach Use

Faro Berdiales LighthouseBiking TrailBermuda Triangle Interpretive SiteBeach Use

Hiking TrailHistoric SiteInterpretive TrailObservation Tower

Parking AreaRest AreaVisitor Contact CenterLookout Area, Binoculars

Scenic ViewWalking Trail
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 109

Figure 21. Proposed alternative roads and trails 
110 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Accommodate and enhance the experience of visitors by: constructing welcoming kiosks, observation 

towers with fixed mounted telescopes, interpretive boardwalks to highlight different habitats; and 

interpretive trails, such as hiking, equestrian, and biking that would close seasonally to minimize 

wildlife impacts. Specific routes have not been established; however, wherever possible, existing 

roads and trails would be incorporated to minimize impacts on the resources. A proposed trail 

through the old growth forest at Monte Pirata would not utilize a previously existing route. 

y Maximize use of both old and new access areas by providing interpretive/directional signs on 

all trails, observation towers, and boardwalks throughout the refuge. 

Issue: Collection of Sea Grapes and Coconuts 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, establish guidelines and officially open designated 

portions of the refuge for collection of sea grapes and coconuts for personal consumption. 

Historic use of the coastal portions of the refuge lands includes the collection of sea grapes and 

coconuts. 

Strategies: 

y Ensure protection of the resources by assessing historic uses and potential impacts of 

removal of sea grapes and coconuts. 

y Identify areas that are appropriate for harvest of these resources and any regulations that are 

necessary to ensure the resources are protected for the future. After this evaluation is 

completed, the refuge would open selected areas for harvest. As additional areas of the 

refuge are cleaned and certified safe, they would be evaluated for suitability for harvest of sea 

grapes and/or coconuts. 

Issue: Fishing 

Objective: Evaluate need and provide improved access for fishing opportunities at a variety of 

locations on the refuge. Fishing is a traditional activity along the refuge beaches and in the 

lagoons. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to permit fishing during daylight hours in the open areas of the refuge. Where 

fishing is compatible and appropriate, it would be permitted 24 hours per day. 

y Maintain the existing boardwalk trail and fishing platform at Laguna Kiani. 

y Continue to permit access to sites historically used for launching boats. 

y Improve and maintain launch areas at Playas Caracas, la Chiva, la Plata, Baracuda Bay, 

Puerto Ferro, and Kiani. 

y Provide parking spaces for vehicles and trailers used by fishermen at Playa la Chiva and a 

fishing access ramp at the western end of the road to Puerto Ferro. 

y Provide signing of access routes to these sites. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 111

y Provide fishery information and regulations at fishing access points throughout the refuge. 

y Conduct inventories of lagoon fisheries resources to determine potential for use and need for 

regulation of uses. 

y Develop a fishing brochure in cooperation with the Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources to provide information and regulations. 

y Install monofilament recycling boxes at each of the access areas. 

y Conduct a yearly fishing derby in conjunction with the commonwealth and Sea Grant. 

Issue: Land Crabbing

Discussion: Under commonwealth regulations, land crabbing is considered to be “fishing.” Capture 

of land crabs is a traditional activity that may be appropriate where it is sustainable and can be 

conducted without long-term impacts on the crabs or other resources. Since land crabbing and 

fishing were identified as separate issues during the scoping process, they are considered separately 

in this plan. All forms of fishing would be considered during the development of the public use 

management step-down plan. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, complete a formal evaluation of the opportunities 

for land crabbing on both the eastern and western refuge lands. 

Strategies: 

y Continue to conduct an experimental land crab trapping program at designated sites on the 

eastern refuge. 

y Cooperate with an ongoing National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration study of 

contamination in land crabs to determine advisability of human consumption of crabs from 

different areas of the refuge. The information from the experimental program and the 

Administration’s study would be incorporated into a program to monitor populations and 

reproduction of land crabs to determine their status and the potential for sustainable harvests. 

If sustainable, a formal program would be incorporated as part of the public use management 

plan scheduled for completion in 2009. Any special regulations governing this activity would 

be consistent with commonwealth regulations. 

Issue: Hunting 

Discussion: Hunting for doves, pigeons, and waterfowl is wildlife-dependent recreation that might be 

appropriate on a national wildlife refuge if it is compatible with other uses and it does not conflict with 

the purposes of the refuge. Since white-crowned pigeon populations are very low, this species would 

be excluded and hunting would not be permitted in areas where they are known or expected to occur. 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, complete an evaluation of potential target 

species and habitats to determine if a hunting program is feasible. 
112 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Strategies: 

y Determine if the populations of doves, pigeons, and waterfowl are adequate to be considered 

for inclusion in a hunting program by cooperating with the Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources to conduct population and reproduction surveys of these species. 

y Develop a hunting plan by 2010, if a determination is made that a hunting program is 

sustainable and appropriate. 

Issue: Interpretive Programs 

Objective: Within five years of plan approval, develop a program to provide and enhance nonpersonal and personal interpretive media and programs that increase awareness and 

understanding of the refuge’s natural and cultural resources. 

Strategies: 

y Develop a public use management plan that would include identification of interpretive themes 

for the refuge. 

y Initiate several activities to aid in the accomplishment of the identified objectives for 

interpretation. These would include: the development of a refuge video that provides basic 

information about the purposes of the refuge and its natural resources; the development of 

various refuge brochures that highlight the refuge, its species, and wildlife-dependent 

activities; initiation of seasonal ranger-guided and self-guided tours of the refuge; 

establishment of interpretive trails and signs explaining the species and the habitats to 

facilitate self-guided or ranger-guided tours; and work with local organizations and individuals 

to establish a refuge cooperating association. 

y Include interpretive exhibits as an integral part of the proposed office/visitor center complex 

being planned for the Camp Garcia vicinity. 

Issue: Environmental Education Programs 

Objective: Within five years of plan approval, develop a program to provide and enhance 

environmental education both on- and off-refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Develop a public use management plan that would include a multi-faceted, curriculum-based 

program for use on- and off-refuge to enhance public awareness and understanding of the 

refuge’s resources, and to inspire action among local, national, and international education 

groups on behalf of the refuge and Vieques Island. 

y Include in the environmental education component of the plan the following: grade-appropriate 

activities and materials that highlight both cultural and natural resources; designation of sites 

for education facilities, including indoor and outdoor classroom settings at various locations on 

the refuge to reduce conflicts between groups and/or activities; development of teacher 

workshop materials; and conduct teacher workshops at the refuge. An additional component 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 113

of the proposed environmental education program would be the development of a cooperating 

association or concession operation that supports curriculum-based environmental education 

activities. 

Issue: Camping 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, determine if and when camping could be permitted 

on the refuge. Camping has historically been a recreational activity on Vieques beaches, 

especially during the Easter season. 

Strategy: 

y Evaluate potential sites for overnight camping associated with environmental education 

activities and compatible recreational uses. If, after evaluation of the potential sites, a 

determination is made that camping is compatible with the refuge mission and purposes, the 

Service would seek to develop a cooperative agreement with a commonwealth or municipal 

agency to manage a limited camping program at the designated sites. Camping associated with 

approved environmental education activities would be authorized through special use permits. 

Issue: Commercial Activities 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, complete necessary evaluations to identify and 

implement appropriate and compatible commercial or concession activities. Commercial 

activities, such as renting of kayaks and beach umbrellas, selling of food or drinks, and providing 

guide services, have been proposed as potential benefits to visitors and as an economic benefit 

to the local community. 

Strategy: 

y Evaluate the potential for permitting commercial wildlife-dependent tours and activities in 

compliance with commonwealth and federal requirements. Where compatible and 

appropriate, plans would be developed to authorize specific activities through concession 

contracts in accordance with Service policy. 

Issue: Interpretation and Conservation of Historical and Archaeological Sites 

Objective: Within four years of plan approval, provide interpretive signing, information and 

appropriate conservation of historical and archaeological sites on refuge lands. As with all 

alternatives, the Service would comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 

and/or any other pertinent historic preservation mandates prior to the initiation of any undertaking 

or habitat management action. 

Strategies: 

y Ensure proper protection and management of these resources by thoroughly evaluating the 

historic and archaeological sites to determine which should be stabilized, which should be 

restored, and which should be subject to interpretation. The sites to be evaluated would, at a 

minimum, include: the lighthouse at Puerto Ferro; the railroad and sugar industry remains at 

Punta Arenas, Taino petroglyphs on eastern Vieques; and the sugar plantation remains at 

Camp Garcia. 
114 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

y Ensure consistency with the Service’s program for historic properties by entering pertinent 

data on the sites into the regional site GIS database within two years of plan approval. 

y Obtain a complete set of the Navy's technical reports describing the refuge’s archaeological, 

historical, architectural, paleoecological, and geomorphological investigations within three 

years of plan approval. 

y Publish a cultural resources overview that provides a detail cultural resources history and 

chronology within five years of plan approval, which describes past investigations, cultural 

resources and their National Register status, and identifies pertinent future research topics. 

Within five years of plan approval, complete the archaeological inventory of refuge lands on 

the western end of the island. 

y Seek agreement with commonwealth agencies and non-governmental organizations for their 

stabilization, restoration, and protection In order to maximize the potential for restoration of 

historical and archaeological sites on the refuge. 

y Develop a plan, in cooperation with partners, to stabilize and restore the Puerto Ferro 

Lighthouse within five years of plan approval. 

Issue: Law Enforcement 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, develop an effective cooperative law enforcement 

program with commonwealth agencies to address illegal activities on refuge lands. Cooperation 

with commonwealth and other federal law enforcement agencies is essential to maximize 

security on the refuge. 

Strategies: 

y Increase enforcement presence on refuge lands through agreements with the commonwealth 

agencies. 

y Train, equip, and schedule Service and cooperating law enforcement agency personnel in 

order to provide adequate security for visitors. 

y Provide, at appropriate locations, boat access and docking facilities for refuge and 

commonwealth vessels to facilitate patrols of beaches and the more remote sections of the 

refuge. 

GOAL 4: Through cooperative efforts with partners, ensure that the refuge is cleaned of all classes 

of contaminants that could pose a threat to the health and safety of the wildlife, residents, staff, and 

visitors. 

Discussion: Effective natural resource management, wildlife-dependent recreational activities, and 

other potential uses of the refuge cannot be realized without a comprehensive clean-up of 

unexploded ordnance and other contaminants that remain from prior uses of the lands. Current 

efforts under the provisions of CERCLA are being carried out to address the contaminants issues on 

the areas currently being managed as the refuge. Clean-up activities would likely continue beyond 

the timeframe of this plan. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 115

Issue: Wildlife and Human Exposure to Contaminants and Explosives 

Objective: Throughout the clean-up process, ensure that the threats and impacts from 

contaminants, unexploded ordnance, munitions and explosives of concern, or explosive 

constituents to nearby communities, visitors, wildlife, and employees are removed to the greatest 

degree possible. Assure that clean-up standards protective of wildlife, plants, and habitats are 

met. 

Strategy: 

y Participate with the Navy, Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Quality Board, 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, and community representatives during 

the development and review of documents and implementation of clean-up plans for all former 

Navy lands. 

Objective: Ensure that refuge resources are adequately protected during the clean-up process. 

Overall clean-up of the refuge lands would involve an extensive process guided by a Federal 

Facilities Agreement between the Environmental Protection Agency, Navy, Environmental 

Quality Board, and Department of the Interior. 

Strategies: 

y Participate in the development and implementation of the Federal Facilities Agreement. 

y Provide first-aid and unexploded ordnance training (through Navy or contract personnel) to the 

staff required to assist the public. 

y Develop a safety plan to cover all refuge operations, including responses to identified 

contaminants or unexploded ordnance issues. 

GOAL 5: Provide the resources needed to implement the selected management alternative. 

Issue: Equipment Needs 

Objective: Annually evaluate needs and submit funding requests to acquire and maintain 

equipment necessary to perform identified management activities 

Strategy: 

y Develop and maintain Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and Service Asset 

Maintenance Management System (SAMMS) project lists and equipment needs. Update 

databases annually to identify the facilities, equipment, projects, and staff needed to carry out 

the programs identified in this CCP/EIS. 

Issue: Facilities Needs 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, formalize plans and funding proposals for visitor 

contact facilities, interpretive displays, and office space to accommodate visitor and staffing 

needs. All new facilities proposed will comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (1992) and 

the Architectural Barriers Act (1968). 
116 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Strategies: 

y Initiate preliminary planning for the proposed visitor center/office complex, including 

maintenance facilities, in the vicinity of Camp Garcia on the eastern refuge tract. The plans 

would be finalized and budget proposals developed for these facilities within three years of 

plan approval. 

y Identify the need to upgrade and maintain the informational kiosk at the Kiani Lagoon 

boardwalk trail and the design and construction of an additional informational kiosk for the 

entrance to the eastern refuge 

Objective: Provide meeting and laboratory space for researchers conducting biological, 

archaeological, or historical investigation to benefit refuge management activities within three 

years of plan approval. 

Strategy: 

y Ensure that these activities are accommodated by evaluating the potential of using existing 

facilities or space developed in conjunction with the proposed visitor center and office in the 

vicinity of Camp Garcia. 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, provide hiking trails to give access to selected 

sites for wildlife-dependent public uses. The public use component of this alternative identifies 

the development of several trails. 

Strategies: 

y Close most of the roads in the former conservation management areas to vehicular access. 

y Develop and maintain selected trails within these areas for access by foot and non-motorized 

conveyance. 

y Adapt previously developed roads or trails for hiking, biking, or horseback access where 

possible. 

y Develop additional trails in the Verdiales and Laguna Kiani areas. Develop an interpretive trail 

at the “old growth” forest on Monte Pirata. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, provide adequate parking for refuge visitors while 

minimizing impacts on the natural resources within three years of plan approval. 

Discussion: At the present time, parking at the beach recreation areas is not organized and visitors 

are permitted to use any open space for parking. This results in greater impacts than would occur 

with an organized system of parking. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 117

Strategies: 

y Organize and reduce the number of roadways associated with parking at Playas Caracas, La 

Chiva, and Punta Arenas to minimize the areas impacted, but still maintain the current level of 

access. 

y Develop and maintain a parking area for access to the proposed “old growth” interpretive trail 

on Monte Pirata. 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, redesign the eastern refuge entrance to provide an 

aesthetically pleasing entrance to the refuge with parking and a visitor contact point. 

Strategy: 

y Develop proposals to provide an aesthetically pleasing entrance with a place for visitors to 

obtain information and directions to refuge attractions. 

Issue: Real Property Management 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, evaluate potential alternatives for land disposal 

and acquisition. 

Strategy: 

y Continue to seek agreement with the municipality of Vieques and/or the commonwealth 

government for the exchange of “Parcel C” for another area or areas of equal value suitable 

for resource management purposes. This parcel on the northwest portion of the eastern 

refuge unit (near the current municipality landfill) was transferred to the Service as a separate 

parcel. Although the remainder of the lands transferred to the Service cannot be exchanged 

or disposed of without congressional approval, “Parcel C” does not fall under that restriction. 

Issue: Staffing Needs 

Objective: Within two years of plan approval, provide both permanent and temporary staff 

needed to accomplish the goals identified under the selected alternative. 

Discussion: Full implementation of the proposed alternative would allow the refuge to conduct more 

active management of the refuge biological resources to increase native species diversity and, at the 

same time, increase opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreational, educational, and interpretive 

programs and activities. Staff increases would be required to administer these programs, to provide 

maintenance of facilities, and to protect resources and the visitors. A total of twenty-five positions 

would be needed to provide the resources to implement this alternative (Figure 22). 

Issue: Use of Volunteers 

Objective: Within one year of plan approval, develop a formal refuge policy to incorporate 

volunteers as a routine component of the refuge management program. 
118 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Figure 22. Organization of personnel under Alternative C 

Refuge Manager 

GS 12-13 

Refuge Biologist 

GS 7-9-11 

Administrative 

Officer 

GS 7-9 

Maintenance 

Leader 

WL 9 

Refuge 

LE 

GS 11 

IT Specialist 

GS 9 

Assistant Refuge 

Manager 

GS 11-12 

Secretary 

GS 5-6 

Maintenance

 Worker 

WG 7

Maintenance 

Worker 

WG 7

Maintenance 

Worker 

WG 5-6- 7

Maintenance 

Worker 

WG 5-6-7

Refuge LE 

GS 5-7-9 

Refuge LE 

GS 5-7-9 

Refuge LE 

GS 5-7 

Refuge 

LE 

GS 5-7

Outreach 

Coordinator 

GS 9-11 

Outreach 

Specialist 

GS 7-9

Outreach 

Specialist 

GS 7-9

Outreach 

Specialist 

GS 7-9

Refuge 

Biologist 

GS 7-9

Biological 

Technician 

GS 5-6-7

Biological 

Technician 

GS 5-6-7

Fire 

Management 

GS 7-9

Fire 

Management 

GS 7-9
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 119

Strategy: 

y Increase outreach to potential volunteers to assist with the expanded biological monitoring 

program, resource management activities, and public use activities. Volunteers would be an 

integral part of both the biological and public use aspects of the management program. 

GOAL 6: Develop effective and open means of communication with Vieques citizens, interested 

groups, and organizations to raise public awareness of refuge programs, management decisions, and 

the mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

Issue: External Communications 

Objective: Within three years of plan approval, develop and implement a formal outreach plan to 

ensure community awareness of refuge programs and activities. 

Discussion: In order to ensure the community is informed of refuge activities and programs, the 

outreach plan (scheduled for completing in 2008) would include a variety of outreach communication 

methods, such as newspapers, websites, news releases, local newspapers, and television and radio 

programs. In addition, issue-specific meetings would be held with community representatives and 

individuals, and the refuge would support the establishment of a cooperating association. 

Objective: By 2008, implement a formal program of cooperation with other agencies and 

organizations. 

Discussion: Through the development of this plan and other documents relating to the management 

of lands in Vieques, the Service has established partnerships with several federal, commonwealth, 

and local agencies and organizations. 

Strategy: 

y Cooperate with the above-named entities to facilitate communications with Vieques residents 

and the Puerto Rican community. Some of the cooperative activities proposed include: 

development of tools for outreach activities in conjunction with the Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources (e.g., exhibits, games, and traveling exhibit); cooperation with the 

Vieques Conservation and Historical Trust to generate community interest in the refuge; 

integration of local schools and clubs into refuge outreach activities; coordination of 

emergency response, law enforcement, and conservation and education activities with 

commonwealth, local agencies, and non-governmental organizations; development of 

partnerships with organizations to seek funding for research, conservation, and educational 

purposes; and, development of a multifaceted Junior Refuge Manager Program for young 

refuge users. 
120 Viequ

Table 7. Comparison of alternatives 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

MANAGEMENT HIGHLIGHTS COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES 

Emergency Access Provide access to Puerto Ferro during hurricane watches and warnings. Upgrade Entrance Upgrade entrance to eastern refuge to improve aesthetics, welcome visitorsFence Removal Reconstruct boundary fences using materials appropriate for refuge. Roads to East Beaches Improve major public use roads to reduce dust, improve drainage, and facilClean Up Participate with Navy, Environmental Quality Board, Environmental Protecti

community to ensure refuge is cleaned of contaminants that pose a threat to wildlife, residents, staff, and visitors. 

Fire Management Program Develop fire suppression capabilities and agreements with local agencies. Research and Educational Access 

Facilitate access to refuge for research and educational activities related to 

Signing Develop and install directional and informational signing to facilitate public uWilderness Area In accordance with legislation the former “Live Impact Area” would be mana

Area.” 

Real Property The Service would continue to seek an agreement with the municipality or c

exchange of “Parcel C.” 

Historic and Archaeological Sites 

Seek agreements with commonwealth agencies and non-governmental orgstabilization, restoration, and protection of historic and archaeological sites. 

Remove Unused Structures Former Navy buildings that are deteriorated and unused would be demolishRehabilitate Utilities Septic system, water, and electric utilities used at Camp Garcia would be m

for use by clean-up personnel, staff, and public. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 1. HABITAT AND WILDLIFE 

Restore Lagoon Hydrology y Evaluate needs, obtain 

permits, and open lagoons when budgets permit. 

y Same as Alternative A, plus 

conduct monitoring to assess conditions and effects of openings; determine priorities for opening; conduct hydrologic studies to determine need for restoration at Kiani Lagoon; as appropriate, open 2-4 lagoons annually; complete 11 specific projects identified in narrative; establish bird survey transects to monitor response to habitat changes; and after five years of monitoring, adapt management program. 

y Sam

budgwouare oyear

Forest Habitat Restorationy Mangroves y Continue to monitor 

mangrove forests and lagoon systems. 

y Review previous mangrove 

forest recommendations; determine the historical status of the mangrove areas; 

y Remove debris from and 

restore mangrove wetlands; 

y Evaluate need for restoration 

of mangrove fringe at Bahia Playa Blanca. 

y Sam
122 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 1. HABITAT AND WILDLIFE (cont’d) 

y Upland Forest y No current management y Establish forest management 

planning units; 

y Establish 5 experimental 

restoration plots of at least 1 acre yearly within the units; 

y Monitor long-term success 

and apply adaptive management techniques; Establish inventory/monitoring plots (e.g., Smithsonian longterm plots); 

y Complete “step down” forest 

management plan by 2008, incorporating information from vegetation and bird surveys and monitoring plots. 

Same experimfewer adetermmanpo

Fire Management y Identify fire breaks and 

acquire equipment. 

y By 2007, identify and map 

firebreaks to protect adjacent communities. 

y Prepare a draft fire plan by 

2007 and final by 2008. 

y By 2008, acquire equipment 

and supplies identified in the fire plan. 

y By 2

firebcom

y In co

DepEnvifire dprepman

y By 2

and the f
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 1. HABITAT AND WILDLIFE (cont’d) 

Grasslands Management y No current management y Maintain selected grasslands 

through cutting, haying, burning, and selective clearing. 

y Sam

Invasive/Exotic Plants y No current management y Initiate control of invasive and 

exotic species while restoring native species on a minimum of 25 acres annually. 

y Conduct biannual surveys of 

exotic or invasive species. 

y Evaluate effectiveness of 

prescribed burning, herbicide treatments, and selective and mechanical removal of mesquite and acacia or other species found. 

y Reintroduce native species 

where removal has been conducted. 

y Develop an education 

program to reduce potential for additional introductions. 

y Sam
124 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 1. HABITAT AND WILDLIFE (cont’d) 

Feral Animal Control y Require owners of horses, 

cattle, dogs, and cats to remove animals. 

y Continue activities from 

Alternative A. 

y Initiate trapping and removal 

of unclaimed feral horses, cattle, dogs, and cats. 

y Survey mongoose and 

iguanas to determine populations and impacts. 

y Initiate control to limit the 

expansion and impacts from these species. 

y Sam

Research Cooperation y Permit and support wildlife 

oriented research. 

y Aggressively seek 

partnerships to develop proposals and conduct research needed to establish baseline data and develop wildlife management programs. 

y Sam
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT 

Endangered & Threatened Speciesy Sea Turtles y Monitor sea turtle nesting in 

cooperation with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, non-governmental organizations, universities, local schools, and the community, including a saturation tagging program on Matias Beach (Yellow). 

y Protect sea turtle nests from 

natural and human activities (e.g., predation, poaching, and public use) 

y Continue activities from 

Alternative A. 

y Monitor all accessible refuge 

beaches for sea turtle nesting activities in cooperation with the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, non-governmental organizations, universities, local schools, and the community. 

y Establish saturation tagging 

program for sea turtle nesting species at all beaches with “significant” nesting to determine population size. 

y Protect sea turtle nests from 

human related disturbances (e.g. vehicles, and lights). 

y Monitor nest predation and 

establish a predator control program, if needed. 

y Enhance nesting habitat 

through planting of native coastal vegetation. 

y Close beaches to recreational 

activities during peak nesting and hatching seasons, as needed. 

y Cont

nestcoopDepEnvinon-orgalocacom

y Esta

progspecto depopu

y Prot

natu(e.g.publ

y Enha

throuvege

y Prom

consand 
126 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT (Cont’d) 

Endangered & Threatened Species (Cont’d)y Roseate Terns y Survey for roseate terns and 

habitat. 

y Conduct surveys to determine 

if roseate terns are nesting or foraging on the refuge. 

y Con

identerns 

y Prev

rose

y Yellow-shouldered Blackbird y No current management 

activity 

y In cooperation and 

coordination with the Commonwealth DNER, evaluate food resources and habitat to identify potential reintroduction sites for the Yellow-shouldered Blackbird. 

y Sam

y Pelicans y No current management 

activity. 

y Assist the Department of 

Natural and Environmental Resources with monitoring of nesting brown pelicans at Cayo Conejo. 

y Assi

NatuResonestCayo 

y Virgin IslandI Tree Boa y Conduct surveys of Virgin 

Island tree boa to determine presence. 

y Same as Alternative A. y Sam
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT (Cont’d) 

Endangered & Threatened Species (Cont’d)y Manatees and Marine 

Mammals 

y Assist others studying 

manatees and responding to marine mammal stranding events on the refuge. 

y Collaborate with other 

research and management entities in studies of manatee movements and in responses to marine mammal stranding events. 

y Sam

y Plants y Survey threatened and 

endangered plants. 

y Complete an inventory of all 

vascular and non-vascular plants with a specific emphasis on federal- and commonwealth-listed species. 

y Same as Alternative A plus: y Establish an endangered 

species plant propagation program. 

y Collect voucher specimens 

and obtain GPS locations for all federal- or commonwealthlisted plant species. 

y Augment existing communities 

and establish new populations with propagated individuals in accordance with species recovery plans. Expand populations of Stahlia monosperma and Goetzia elegans.

y Samy Colle

all splocatcomspec

y Wor

agenorgapromrecocomrefugpropor enof plmoneleg
128 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT (Cont’d) 

Endangered & Threatened Species (Cont’d)Wading Bird Management y Conduct preliminary surveys 

to obtain baseline data. 

y Conduct surveys to obtain 

baseline data and monitor wading birds. 

y Identify, manage, and protect 

feeding, mating, roosting, and nesting habitats used by wading birds. 

y Conduct surveys to determine 

the numbers of shorebirds using the refuge during migration. 

y Con

birds base

y Iden

feednestwad

y Ensu

activdistuwith activmigrspec

y Wor

institsociecensfor w
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT (Cont’d) 

Endangered & Threatened Species (Cont’d)Waterfowl Management y Conduct preliminary surveys 

to obtain baseline data. 

y Conduct surveys to obtain 

baseline data and monitor waterfowl in wetland areas. 

y Identify, manage, and protect 

feeding, mating, roosting, and nesting habitats used by waterfowl. 

y Con

obta

y Ensu

activdistuaffec

y Eval

openhuntrefug

y Iden

feednestwate

y Wor

institornitcondmonpopu
130 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT (Cont’d) 

Endangered & Threatened Species (Cont’d)Sea Bird Management Other Birds 

y Survey and identify potential 

sea bird nesting sites. 

y Continue banding program. y With Department of Natural 

and Environmental Resources, survey key species (e.g., white-crowned pigeon). 

y Conduct surveys to obtain 

baseline population and nesting data and monitor sea birds. 

y Identify, manage, and protect 

feeding, mating, roosting, and nesting habitats used by sea birds. 

y Ensure that management 

activities and human disturbances do not interfere with nesting and other activities sea birds. 

y Conduct nesting season 

inventories of cliff habitats. 

y Expand banding program to at 

least four times per year and include sites on both east and west Vieques. Incorporate cooperators (e.g., Department of Natural and Environmental Resources and nongovernmental organizations) into the banding program. 

y Con

basespec

y Iden

feednestbirds

y Wor

institsociecensfor s

y Ensu

activdistuaffec

y 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT (Cont’d) 

Endangered & Threatened Species (Cont’d)Other Birds (Cont’d) y Establish survey routes within 

subtropical moist and dry forests to track trends of key species (e.g., white-crowned pigeon and Adelaide’s warbler) in these habitats. 

y Continue to coordinate 

surveys of white-crowned pigeon with Department of Natural and Environmental Resources and identify critical nesting and feeding areas for this species. 

y Utilize survey information to 

help develop forest habitat management recommendations for the forest management plan. 

y Initia

shorfor wutilizrepewith EnviSociPuernon-

y Esta

subtrto tra(e.g.Adelhabit

y Cont

DepaEnvicondcrownesti

y Utiliz

devemanfor th
132 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT (Cont’d) 

Endangered & Threatened Species (Cont’d)Amphibians and Reptiles y No current management. y Conduct surveys to confirm 

the presence or absence of reported amphibians and reptiles. 

y Establish transects or study 

plots to quantify the abundance and distribution of amphibian and reptile species.

y Actively encourage university 

and high school student participation in the surveys and conservation of these species. 

y Sam

Mammals Management y No current management. y Conduct surveys to determine 

the population status of bat species. 

y Mist net twice a year to 

determine the presence and relative abundance of bats. 

y Promote bat research and 

management work by universities and students. 

y Implement management 

recommendations provided by bat studies. 

y Sam
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT (Cont’d) 

Endangered & Threatened Species (Cont’d)Fishery Management y Provide information to public 

and enforce commonwealth regulations. 

y By 2008, in conjunction with 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, develop a fishery resource plan to aid the establishment of management programs and fishing regulations for the lagoon systems. 

y Continue to provide 

information to the public and enforce commonwealth fishing regulations. 

y Coordinate with Department of 

Natural and Environmental Resources’ fishery personnel to ensure enforcement of commonwealth regulations on or adjacent to the refuge. 

y Conduct surveys in Kiani and 

Playa Grande Lagoons to assess species, size, and abundance. 

y Provide information to the 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources for use in developing Commonwealth regulations. 

y Sam
134 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 2 SPECIAL EMPHASIS SPECIES MANAGEMENT (Cont’d) 

Endangered & Threatened Species (Cont’d)Invertebrates y No current management. y Conduct a characterization of 

macro invertebrate fauna at Laguna Playa Grande and Laguna Kiani. 

y Conduct a macro invertebrate 

survey on refuge lands, focusing on the mangroves, subtropical dry forest, and subtropical moist forest types. 

y Conduct an extensive survey 

of terrestrial invertebrates, with emphasis on the search for the historical record of the endemic land snail (Pseudopineria viequense). 

y Con

survfoculagoand type

y Con

of teemphistoende(Pse
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 3. COMPATIBLE RECREATION, EDUCATION, AND INTERPRETATION 

Recreational Beach Activities y Maintain current access and 

facilities at Punta Arenas, La Chiva, and Caracas Beaches. 

y Same as Alternative A plus: y Consult with commonwealth 

agencies (Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, Parques Nacionales) regarding the potential for a cooperative agreement for the management of the high public use beach recreation areas. 

y In cooperation with the 

appropriate commonwealth agencies, install composting toilet at high public use beach locations. 

y Sam

Public Access y Public access to open areas 

from dawn to dusk. 

y Same as Alternative A. y Publ

permwildl

y Con

stud

y Deve

the n

y Deve

survsatis

y Main

curreopen provarea
136 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 3. COMPATIBLE RECREATION, EDUCATION, AND INTERPRETATION (Con

Collection of Sea Grapes, Coconuts etc. Fishing 

y Assess historic uses and 

potential impacts. 

y Officially open appropriate 

sites. 

y Permitted during daylight 

hours. 

y Maintain existing facilities at 

Kiani Lagoon. 

y Conduct experimental night 

fishing program. 

y Continue access to historic 

launch sites. 

y Same as Alternative A. y Same as Alternative A plus 

provide fishery information and regulations at fishing access points throughout the refuge. 

y Conduct inventories of lagoon 

fisheries resources to determine potential for use and need for regulation of uses. 

y Where compatible with other 

refuge programs and management needs, permit night fishing by permit. 

y Sam

idensuitaup aare fcont

y Sam

plusappracceper d

y Insta

fishincomregu

y Main

acceChivBaraand signthes
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 3. COMPATIBLE RECREATION, EDUCATION, AND INTERPRETATION (Con

Fishing (Cont’d) y In cooperation with 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, develop a fishing brochure to provide information and describe regulations and conditions of permits. 

y Repair or replace fishing 

platform at Laguna Kiani. 

y Iden

vehifishe

y Deve

at thto Pu

y Insta

boxearea

y Prov

for thconjNatuReso

y Main

fishinLago

Hunting y No hunting permitted. y In conjunction with 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, initiate population and reproduction surveys of doves, pigeons, and waterfowl that could be considered for inclusion in a hunting program. 

y If appropriate, develop a 

hunting plan by 2010. 

y Prohibit hunting in areas 

where white-crowned pigeons are known or expected to occur. 

y Sam
138 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 3. COMPATIBLE RECREATION, EDUCATION, AND INTERPRETATION (Con

Land Crabbing y Conduct experimental 

program on eastern sites. 

y Cooperate with NOAA study 

to determine contamination levels. 

y

y Same as Alternative A. y Sam

initiapoputo deharv

Interpretive Programs y Continue limited interpretive 

programs as staff and funding permit. 

y Same as Alternative A. y Prov

persinterprogawaof thcultu

y With

interrefug

y With

visitoplan

y With

visitoplan

y Devey Deve

refugthe rdepe

y Deve

refugexhi
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

Interpretive Programs (Cont’d) y Initia

and refug

y Deve

signand self-

y Wor

and refugasso

GOAL 3. COMPATIBLE RECREATION, EDUCATION, AND INTERPRETATION (Con

Environmental Education Programs 

y Continue limited programs for 

school groups as resources permit. 

y Provide and enhance 

environmental education. 

y Develop a multi-faceted, 

curriculum-based program for use on and off the refuge to enhance public awareness and understanding of the refuge’s resources and to inspire action among local, national, and international educational groups on behalf of the refuge and Vieques Island. 

y Prov

envi

y Deve

curriuse enhaunderesoamointergrouand 

y Deve

enviactivhighnatu
140 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

Environmental Education Programs (Cont’d)

y Deve

educoutdsettithe rbetwactiv

y Deve

the aseekeducfollow

y Deve

envioutreothe

y Deve

educteacrefug

y Deve

matework

y Enco

operof thcurrienvisale
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 3. COMPATIBLE RECREATION, EDUCATION, AND INTERPRETATION (Con

Camping y No camping permitted. y Evaluate potential sites for 

overnight camping associated with environmental education activities. 

y If compatible with the refuge 

mission permit camping associated with permitted environmental education activities. 

y Eval

overwith activrecre

y If co

missagreor mmanprog

Commercial Activities y No commercial or concession 

activities permitted. 

y Within 3 years, evaluate the 

potential of permitting compatible commercial wildlife-dependent tours and activities in compliance with commonwealth and federal requirements. 

y With

poteapprcomoperactivtoursrentarenta
142 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 3. COMPATIBLE RECREATION, EDUCATION, AND INTERPRETATION (Con

Historic and Archaeological Sites 

y Comply with Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act and/or any other pertinent historic preservation mandates prior to the initiation of any refuge undertaking or habitat management action. 

y Maintain current access 

without further interpretation, restoration, or protection. 

y Comply with Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act and/or any other pertinent historic preservation mandates prior to the initiation of any refuge undertaking or habitat management action. 

y Within four years of plan 

approval, provide interpretive signing, information and appropriate conservation of historical and archaeological sites on refuge lands. 

y Maintain current level of 

access. 

y Com

NatioAct ahistoprior refugman

y With

apprsignapprhistosites 

y Eval

archdetestabrestosubjsites minilightrailroremaTainVieqplanGarc
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

Historic and Archaeological Sites (Cont’d) y With

pertirefugpropSite 

y With

comtechits aarchand inve

y With

cultuprovresochroinverefugtheir and rese

y With

the arefugend 

y With

restoLigh
144 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 3. COMPATIBLE RECREATION, EDUCATION, AND INTERPRETATION (Con

Law Enforcement y Ensure that law enforcement 

staff are trained and equipped to provide adequate security for visitors.

y Cooperate with 

commonwealth to provide additional law enforcement for refuge. 

y Same as Alternative A. y Ensu

enfoequiprovthe v

y Coo

law eprovpres

y Prov

dockcomapprfacilirefug

GOAL 4. CONTAMINANTS REMOVAL 

Wildlife and Human Exposure y See Management Highlights 

Common to All Alternatives 

y Same as Alternative A. y Sam

GOAL 5. ADMINISTRATION AND FACILITIES 

Equipment Needs y Maintain RONS and SAMMS 

lists (Appendix XI) in accordance with needs Identified in the alternative. 

y Same as Alternative A. y Sam

Facilities Needs y Maintain existing office space 

at Isabel Segunda. 

y Maintain kiosk at Kiani 

Lagoon. 

y Finalize plans for a combined 

visitor contact station and office in the vicinity of Camp Garcia on eastern Vieques. 

y Fina

propcentvicineast
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

Facilities Needs (Cont’d) y Maintain maintenance 

facilities at Isabel Segunda with limited facilities at Camp Garcia. 

y Utilize current office space to 

facilitate research and investigations. 

y Maintain currently opened 

roads and trails. 

y Maintain current parking 

areas at Punta Arenas, La Chiva, and Caracas beaches.

y Maintain the informational 

kiosk adjacent to the Kiani Lagoon boardwalk trail. 

y Develop plans for additional 

maintenance facilities and upgrade and maintain the existing facilities at the Camp Garcia site. 

y Provide meeting and 

laboratory space for researchers conducting biological, archaeological, or historical investigation at existing facilities or space developed in conjunction with the proposed visitor contact station and office in the vicinity of Camp Garcia. 

y Roads in conservation 

management areas will be closed to vehicular access. Selected trails within these areas will be maintained for access by foot and nonmotorized conveyance. 

y Organize and reduce 

roadways associated with parking at Playas Caracas, La Chiva, and Punta Arenas. 

y Upg

inforLago

y Desi

contto th

y Deve

propfaciliwith visitothe C

y Prov

laboresebiolohistoconjvisitovicin

y Crea

hikinat dithat to m

y Prov

signtowethrou

y Roa

mancloseSele
146 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

Facilities Needs (Cont’d) area

accemotoAddideveLagu

y Deve

the “Mon

y Main

areaPlay

y Reo

Arenroadspacuse. 

y Iden

provgrowMon

y Deve

specrefugvisito

y Prep

requOpe(RO
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 5. ADMINISTRATION AND FACILITIES (Cont’d) 

Real Property Management y See Management Highlights 

Common to All Alternatives. 

y Same as Alternative A. y Sam

Staffing y Maintain current staffing: 

y Refuge Manager (1); Refuge 

Biologist (1); Administrative Officer (1); Maintenance Staff (3); Law Enforcement (4); Outreach Coordinator (1) (See Figure 17) 

y Request resources to 

accommodate increased biological monitoring and habitat management programs: 

y Refuge Manager (1); Refuge 

Biologist (2); Biological Technicians (2); Administrative Staff (3); Maintenance Staff (6); Law Enforcement (5); Outreach Staff (2). (See Figure 18) 

y Req

increuse 

y Refu

RefuBioloTechStaff (7); LOutrFigu

Volunteers y Seek assistance, accept, and 

work with volunteers. 

y Develop policy and increase 

outreach to potential volunteers to assist with an expanded biological monitoring program and refuge management activities 

y Deve

inforpackbackvoluwho monvisitoon th
148 Viequ

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

GOAL 6 EFFECTIVE AND OPEN COMMUNICATION WITH THE COMMUNITY 

External Communications y Continue to use news 

releases, flyers, and meetings on a periodic basis to communicate with the community, 

y Same as Alternative A. y Deve

formensuof reactiv

y Use 

comas nreleacoluprog

y Con

oppoon-oto-homee

y Supp

coop

y Deve

with and (e.g.traveactiv

y Wor

Conand Envigenethe r
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

ISSUES ALTERNATIVE A CURRENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE B WILDLIFE EMPHASIS 

P

External Communications (Cont’d)

y Wor

schoclubactiv

y Mee

state govecooremeenfoand 

y Part

fundconspurp

y Deve

Refuall yoincluvia t
150 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

ACTIONS OR PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BUT NOT FULLY DEVELOPED OR INCLUDED IN 

THE ALTERNATIVES 

This section provides a discussion of several projects or actions that were proposed during the 

development of the CCP/EIS but for various reasons have not been included in alternatives. 

During the scoping process, several issues, important to the community of Vieques, were identified by 

individuals and organizations providing recommendations for the Service to consider during the 

development of the CCP/EIS. Among these issues were several that are beyond the authority of the 

Fish and Wildlife Service to address. One of the comments received from several respondents was 

that the Service should transfer refuge lands or portions of refuge lands to the people or municipality 

of Vieques. 

The legislation that mandated the establishment of the refuge specifically stated that any transfer 

would require that additional legislation be enacted by Congress. Without specific congressional 

approval, consideration of land transfers is beyond the authority of the agency, and therefore is not 

considered in this planning document. One exception to the restriction on the transfer of property is 

the area known as “Parcel C.” This is a 98-acre parcel located on the northwestern portion of the 

eastern refuge near the existing municipal landfill. The Service’s authority to transfer this parcel is 

limited to exchange for another parcel of comparable value that could be managed for natural 

resource purposes. The Service has contacted the municipality of Vieques to explain this restriction 

and to seek a mutually acceptable exchange that would permit the municipality to utilize “Parcel C” for 

expansion of the municipal landfill or other appropriate municipal purpose. 

In December 2004, Governor Calderon approved the Master Plan for Sustainable Development of 

Vieques and Culebra. This document identified several activities that might be conducted on the 

areas under the jurisdiction of the Fish and Wildlife Service and provided zoning classifications for the 

refuge lands. The Service provided comments on the draft master plan to the Vieques Culebra 

Special Commissioner in a letter dated November 23, 2004 (Appendix IV). That letter addressed, 

among other issues, the zoning classifications that were identified for some of the refuge lands. 

These zoning classifications included areas for residential and agricultural development, ecotourism, 

etc. Residential development, ecotourism lodges, and many agricultural activities are not normally 

considered appropriate or compatible uses for a national wildlife refuge. 

Both the Master Plan for Sustainable Development and comments submitted during the scoping of 

issues for this CCP/EIS suggested the potential for development of wind generators on the eastern 

portions of the refuge. Any proposed use of the refuge must be compatible with the refuge purposes 

and other authorized and compatible uses and consideration of any such uses would require a 

thorough evaluation to show that the refuge purposes would not be adversely affected. Since 

migratory birds, including endangered species, are known to utilize the refuge and adverse effects 

from wind generators on avian species have been documented, it would be inappropriate to consider 

placement of wind generators on a refuge that has a mission to conserve and protect these species. 

A proposal to utilize refuge forest resources for a bio-generation project was also presented during 

the scoping period. One of the objectives of the refuge is to restore native forest species. This 

activity may, at times, require the removal of exotic and invasive, non-native species, however, the 

primary objective of any timber removal must be the restoration of the forest, while maintaining the 

wildlife resources that utilize both the native and non-native forest. Unless timber utilization is an 

integral part of the natural resource restoration program, it would not be appropriate for the refuge. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 151

Grazing, haying, and other agricultural activities were identified during the scoping process as 

activities that could potentially provide economic benefits to a segment of the local community. 

Grazing and haying can be utilized for management of grasslands on national wildlife refuges under 

specific conditions where they are an integral part of a habitat management program. As the stepdown management plans for Vieques are developed, these activities will be considered along with 

other habitat management techniques to accomplish specific habitat restoration goals. At the present 

time, agricultural activities are not included in the alternatives, since the habitat restoration plans have 

not been developed. Prior to incorporation of agricultural activities into any management program, 

the resource impacts and benefits would need to be analyzed and a compatibility determination 

would need to be developed. 

 
152 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 153

IV. Environmental Consequences 

INTRODUCTION 

This chapter describes the potential environmental impacts that may result from implementation of 

each of the alternatives considered and described in Chapter III. The impacts are discussed for the 

major categories described in Chapter II (i.e., physical, biological and socioeconomic factors). The 

parameters within each of these categories that are evaluated are those that may be impacted by the 

strategies identified in the alternatives. These parameters are identified in Table 8. Chapter II 

includes aspects of the affected environment that are not specifically included in this analysis since 

they will not be affected by any of the alternatives (e.g., topography) or they are components of the 

strategies that may affect the other resources (e.g., contaminants/hazardous materials, and roads, 

utilities, and infrastructure). By comparing the environmental consequences of the alternatives, the 

Service and other reviewers can determine which alternative results in the best combination of 

beneficial effects without unacceptable adverse impacts. 

Table 8. Environmental consequences evaluation factors 

Physical Environment 

Soils 

Hydrology and Water Quality 

Air Quality 

Aesthetics 

Biological Resources 

Flora and Fauna 

Threatened and Endangered Species 

Species of Special Concern 

Noxious/Invasive Species 

Socio-Economic Factors 

Archaeological and Historic Resources 

Employment 

Public Uses 
154 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

In the discussion of environmental consequences, impacts are described in terms of severity 

(negligible, minor, moderate, and major), duration (short-term or long-term), and extent (local, refugewide, or regional). Impacts are not necessarily limited to the refuge property. While many impacts 

occur on a small, localized scale (i.e., vegetation and soil disturbance during construction at a specific 

site), impacts may also occur on a larger regional scale (i.e., socioeconomic impacts from increased 

visitation). Impacts may be either adverse or beneficial, or a combination of adverse and beneficial. 

A summary of criteria used for rating the severity of impacts is presented in Table 9. 

EFFECTS COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES 

Specific environmental and social impacts of implementing each alternative are examined for the 

criteria in the broad categories of physical environment, biological resources, and socioeconomic 

factors (Table 8). Some potential effects of the alternative management schemes, however, are 

similar under all alternatives and are summarized below. 

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 

Climate Change Impacts 

The Department of the Interior issued an order in January 2001 requiring federal agencies under its 

direction with land management responsibilities to consider potential climate change impacts as part 

of long-range planning endeavors. 

Sea-level rise is one of the most certain results of global warming. During the last century, the 

average global sea-level has risen 4 to 10 inches. Predictions indicate that this rate of rise could 

double during the next century. At the Vieques refuge, the resources that could be impacted most 

include the coastal mangrove forests and lagoon systems. It is not possible to predict the exact 

amount of sea-level rise or the quantity of these coastal resources that may be impacted, however, 

the potential loss of mangroves and shallow lagoon nursery and foraging areas for transient fish and 

wildlife species could negatively affect the overall productivity of the refuge. The primary goals of the 

Service with regard to sea-level rise are to monitor the condition of the coastal resources and 

wherever possible initiate adaptive management practices to minimize adverse impacts on the 

habitats and wildlife species using them. 

The increase of carbon within the earth’s atmosphere has been linked to the gradual rise in surface 

temperature commonly referred to as global warming. In relation to comprehensive conservation 

planning for national wildlife refuges, carbon sequestration constitutes the primary climate-related 

impact to be considered. The Department of Energy’s “Carbon Sequestration Research and 

Development” (U.S. DOE 1999) defines carbon sequestration as “...the capture and secure storage of 

carbon that would otherwise be emitted to or remain in the atmosphere.” 

The land is a tremendous force in carbon sequestration. Grasslands, forests, wetlands, tundra, 

perpetual ice, and desert are effective in both preventing carbon emission and acting as a biological 

“scrubber” of atmospheric carbon monoxide. The Department of Energy’s report concluded that 

ecosystem protection is important to carbon sequestration and may reduce or prevent loss of carbon 

currently stored in the terrestrial biosphere. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 155

Preserving natural habitat for wildlife is the heart of any long-range plan for national wildlife refuges. 

The actions proposed in the CCP/EIS would conserve or restore land, water, and forest resources 

and would thus enhance carbon sequestration. This, in turn, would contribute positively to efforts to 

mitigate human-induced global climate changes. 

Impacts to the physical environment from construction and maintenance activities would involve the 

potential for increased dust and erosion from ground disturbing activities, air quality degradation from 

heavy equipment, and decreased aesthetic appeal during project development. The Service is 

committed to using “best management practices” in order to minimize the impact on the environment 

from these activities. These impacts are expected to be short-term and minor. Operation and 

maintenance of all facilities, including roads, buildings, and public use activities, are expected to 

cause long-term, minor impacts to the local area. 
156 Viequ

Table 9. Criteria for rating severity of impacts 

Short-term = Less than five years, normally during construction and recovery. Long-term = Longer than five years, normally from operations. Cumulative = Cumulative impacts to environmental resources result from incremental effects of proposed a

with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the area. 

Issue 

Impact Severity: 

Negligible Minor Moderate 

Soil Resources 

Impact not perceptible and not measurable; not affecting surroundings. 

Impact localized and slightly detectable but would not affect overall structure of any natural community. 

Impact clearly detectable; could affect individual species, communities, or natural processes appreciably. 

Imainreinsn

Hydrology and Water Quality 

Impact not detectable, no discernible effect on hydrology or water quality. 

Impact slightly detectable but would not affect overall hydrology or water quality. 

Impact clearly detectable and could have an appreciable effect on the hydrology or water quality. 

Imsnpe

Air Quality Impact not perceptible 

and not measurable; not affecting surroundings. 

Impact perceptible but not measurable; would remain localized. 

Impact detectable and possibly affecting integrity of surroundings. 

Abwim

Contaminants/ Hazardous Materials 

Impact not perceptible and not measurable; not affecting surroundings. 

Impact perceptible but not measurable; would remain localized. 

Impact measurable and possibly affecting integrity of surroundings. Clean-up necessary. 

Carebs
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

Issue 

Impact Severity: 

Negligible Minor Moderate 

Aesthetics Impact not perceptible 

and not measurable; not affecting surroundings. 

Impact perceptible but not measurable; would remain localized. 

Impact detectable and possibly affecting integrity of surroundings. 

Imss

Flora and Fauna Impact localized and not 

detectable, or at lowest levels of detection. 

Impact localized and slightly detectable but would not affect overall structure of any natural community. 

Impact clearly detectable; could affect individual species, communities, or natural processes appreciably. 

Imainreinsn

Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate Species 

Change in a population or individuals of a species; consequences to population not measurable or perceptible, or other changes not measurable or perceptible. 

Change in a population or individuals of a species, if measurable, would be small and localized, or other changes would be slight but detectable. 

Change in a population or individuals of a species measurable but localized. 

Coswpto 

Species of Special Concern 

Change in a population or individuals of a species; consequences to population not measurable or perceptible, or other changes not measurable or perceptible. 

Change in a population or individuals of a species, if measurable, would be small and localized, or other changes would be slight but detectable. 

Change in a population or individuals of a species measurable but localized. 

Coswpto 
158 Viequ

Issue 

Impact Severity: 

Negligible Minor Moderate 

Noxious/Invasive Species 

Change in a population or individuals of a species; consequences to population not measurable or perceptible, or other changes not measurable or perceptible. 

Change in a population or individuals of a species, if measurable, would be small and localized, or other changes would be slight but detectable. 

Change in a population or individuals of a species measurable but localized. 

Coswpto 

Archaeological and Historic Resources 

Impact barely perceptible and not measurable; confined to small areas or affecting a single contributing element of a larger National Register District with low data potential. 

Impact perceptible and measurable, but would remain localized; affecting a single contributing element of a larger National Register District with low to moderate data potential, or would not affect character-defining features of a National Register-eligible or listed property. 

Impact sufficient to change a characterdefining feature but would not diminish resource’s integrity enough to jeopardize its National Register eligibility, or it generally would involve a single or small group of contributing elements with moderate to high data potential. 

SncferemloNogesep

Employment Impact not detectable, no 

discernible effect on socioeconomic environment. 

Impact slightly detectable but would not affect overall socioeconomic environment. 

Impact clearly detectable and could have an appreciable effect on the socioeconomic environment. 

Imsnpse
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 

Issue 

Impact Severity: 

Negligible Minor Moderate 

Public Use Impact not detectable, no 

discernible effect on public use activities. 

Impact slightly detectable but would not affect overall public use activities. 

Impact clearly detectable and could have an appreciable effect on public use activities. 

Imsnpp

Socioeconomic Resources 

Impact not detectable, no discernible effect on socioeconomic environment. 

Impact slightly detectable but would not affect overall socioeconomic environment. 

Impact clearly detectable and could have an appreciable effect on the socioeconomic environment. 

Imsnpse
160 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

To varying degrees, each of the alternatives would protect habitat types important to migratory birds, 

reptiles, amphibians, fish, invertebrates and flora, including threatened and endangered species. 

Alternative A would provide the least amount of habitat protection and management emphasis, while 

Alternative B would provide the most protection and management. Implementation of any of the 

alternatives would benefit and not likely adversely affect threatened or endangered species or habitats. 

Adverse effects to the biological resources would occur as a result of construction of facilities, 

rehabilitation of roads, creation of fire breaks, rehabilitation of utilities and removal of unused 

structures. These activities would cause the localized removal of vegetation and habitat for birds and 

noise that could disturb wildlife in the vicinity of the projects. The most significant impacts would 

occur during the construction phase for these projects. Because the project sites are limited in size, 

these impacts would be short-term, minor-to-moderate, and local. 

SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS 

Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations 

and Low Income Populations,” was signed by President Clinton on February 11, 1994, to focus 

Federal attention on the environmental and human health conditions of minority and low-income 

populations with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all communities. The order 

directed Federal agencies to develop environmental justice strategies to aid in identifying and 

addressing disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their 

programs, policies, or activities on minority or low-income populations. The order is also intended to 

promote nondiscrimination in federal programs substantially affecting human health and the 

environment, and to provide minority and low-income communities’ access to public information in 

matters relating to human health or the environment. 

None of the management alternatives described in this CCP/EIS would disproportionately place any 

adverse environmental, economic, social, or health impacts on minority or low-income populations. 

Implementation of any action alternative that includes public use and environmental education would 

actually provide a benefit to citizens living in the vicinity of the refuge. 

Compatibility Determinations 

The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, states that national wildlife refuges must be protected from 

incompatible or harmful human activities to ensure that Americans can enjoy refuge system lands and 

waters. Before activities or uses are allowed on a national wildlife refuge, the uses must be found to be 

compatible. A compatible use “...will not materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the 

mission of the refuge system or the purposes of the refuge.” “Wildlife-dependent recreational uses may 

be authorized on a refuge when they are compatible and not inconsistent with public safety.” 

A compatibility determination is a document that assesses the compatibility of an activity according to 

the above criteria. The Vieques Refuge has prepared compatibility determinations for activities 

proposed in this CCP/EIS. Any additional activities that are considered must meet the compatibility 

standards prior to being authorized. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 161

Land Acquisition 

The administrative jurisdiction for the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge was transferred to the Fish 

and Wildlife Service in accordance with public laws of the United States. There was no provision in 

these laws for further acquisition or expansion of the refuge. No land acquisition is proposed under 

any of the alternatives presented in this CCP/EIS. However, one parcel of approximately 98 acres 

was transferred to the Service under a different authority. This parcel, referred to as “Parcel C,” was 

previously proposed for transfer to the municipality of Vieques by the Navy. The authorities of the 

Service do not permit the transfer of this land, but they do permit an exchange for comparable 

property. Under all alternatives, the Service will pursue an agreement with the municipality or another 

agency of the commonwealth to facilitate such an exchange if it is desired by the municipality. 

 

Refuge Revenue-Sharing 

Since the Vieques Refuge lands are owned by the federal government, they are not subject to Puerto 

Rico property taxes, however, under the provisions of the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act, the Service 

makes annual payments to the local taxing authority to offset the loss of property tax revenues. The 

payments authorized for the Vieques Refuge are equivalent to 3⁄4 of 1 percent of the fair market value. 

The Revenue Sharing Act requires that the land be reappraised every 5 years to ensure that 

payments are equitable. The funds for these payments come from revenues received from refuge 

products such as timber, grazing fees, oil and gas royalties, and leases and permit fees. Since these 

funds are not generally adequate to make a full distribution to all taxing authorities, Congress is 

authorized to appropriate funds to make up the shortfall. Congress does not always fully appropriate 

adequate funding and the taxing authorities receive a pro-rata share of the authorized amount. In 

2004, the Revenue Sharing payment allocated for Vieques Refuge was $146,683. This amount was 

41 percent of the total authorized by the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act. Annual refuge revenuesharing payments, also known as payment in lieu of taxes, will be provided under any of the 

alternatives. 

Wilderness Area 

In accordance with the legislation that created the refuge, the former “Live Impact Area” will be 

managed as a “wilderness area.” Based on a wilderness review conducted in 2005, no additional 

areas are considered appropriate for inclusion in the Wilderness System. The environmental 

consequences of the wilderness management are primarily related to the exclusion of public uses 

from this area. The significance of this impact is somewhat reduced because there are similar sites 

that will be available for public use activities that might otherwise have been available in the area 

managed as a wilderness. The impact of managing this area as a wilderness without public access is 

considered to be long-term, minor-to-moderate, and regional, since potential use by visitors from 

other areas would be affected. 

COMPARISON OF EFFECTS OF THE ALTERNATIVES 

The following discussion provides a brief comparison of the impacts of the different alternatives 

based on the relative effect each would have on the physical, biological, and socioeconomic 

resources. Following this discussion is a matrix that provides a side-by-side comparison of the 

effects of the alternatives (Table 12). 
162 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 

Soil Resources 

Under all alternatives impacts to soils would occur from removal and deposition of surface material at 

construction project sites, compaction from heavy equipment, removal of vegetative cover that 

protects the areas from erosion, and localized contamination from construction and maintenance 

activities. These impacts are generally short-term and minor. In the immediate area of road, trail, or 

parking lot, construction impacts are long-term and moderate. 

Disturbance of and impacts to the soil resources of the refuge would be less under Alternative A than 

under the other alternatives since fewer construction and management activities would be 

undertaken. The greatest impacts would occur with implementation of Alternative C. Under this 

alternative, the Service would construct a visitor center/office/maintenance complex in the Camp 

Garcia vicinity, develop roads and trails on both eastern and western refuge lands, construct 

observation towers, open lagoons to tidal flushing, develop a trail and parking at the Monte Pirata “old 

growth” forest, and provide increased public access to refuge lands. Although habitat management, 

reforestation, and invasive species control measures would be greater in Alternative B, impacts from 

these activities would be short-term; whereas, the new roads’ trails and facilities would have longterm, minor-to-moderate local impacts. 

Hydrology and Water Quality 

Adverse water quality impacts from refuge activities would primarily result from erosion at 

construction or habitat management sites. The opening of lagoons to tidal flushing would be 

expected to result in improved water quality in the lagoons and increased benefits to the aquatic 

resources found there. Some adverse water quality impacts could occur due to increased discharge 

of sediments and impounded waters to the marine environment during storm events. 

Under alternative A, lagoons would be opened only occasionally; whereas, Alternative B would 

increase the number of lagoons opened to two to four annually. Alternative C would result in the 

opening of one or two lagoons each year. Under all alternatives, if lagoons are opened, the water 

quality and habitat responses would be monitored and management would be adapted, as 

necessary, to mitigate any adverse environmental responses. 

Alternatives B and C call for the installation of composting toilets at the high public use beaches (Punta 

Arenas, Caracas and La Chiva). Since Alternative C provides for an increase in the areas open and 

facilities available for public uses (e.g., hiking and biking trails and observation towers), an increase in the 

numbers of visitors is anticipated. The proposed sanitary facilities at the visitor center and composting 

toilets at the beach sites are expected to ensure maintenance of high water quality. Alternative A does 

not provide facilities for the current level or anticipated future levels of public use. The water quality 

impacts from the public uses are expected to be long-term, minor, and local under all alternatives. 

Alternative C provides for the expansion and development of maintenance facilities in the Camp 

Garcia vicinity. This use would increase the potential for spills of gasoline, lubricants, and other 

chemicals used for management activities. 

 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 163

Air Quality 

All alternatives would provide for resurfacing portions of the main access road on eastern Vieques 

and would, therefore, reduce dust and airborne particulate matter in the area of highest public uses. 

Opening of additional roads and trails under Alternative C would create the potential for more dust 

from cars, bikes, horses, and foot traffic on unpaved surfaces. 

Alternatives B and C provide for more habitat management that would utilize heavy equipment and 

potentially fire as a management tool. These activities would increase emissions of exhaust and smoke 

that would cause a short-term, minor-to-moderate deterioration in air quality in the local vicinity. 

Contaminants/Hazardous Materials 

Clean-up of potential contaminants and unexploded ordnance were some of the major concerns 

expressed during the scoping meetings with the Vieques community. When the administrative 

jurisdiction for the former Navy lands was transferred to the Fish and Wildlife Service, the 

responsibility for the clean-up of contaminants and unexploded ordnance was retained by the Navy. 

The Service’s role in the clean-up process is through coordination with the Navy, the Environmental 

Protection Agency, and the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board. The relationship of the parties 

during this process is guided by a Federal Facilities Agreement that defines the respective role of 

each of the agencies. This agreement is currently under development and will guide all of the 

agencies during the course of the clean-up. At the same time, the comprehensive conservation plan 

will guide the management of the refuge for the next 15 years and will assist the parties to the 

Federal Facilities Agreement in developing priorities for the clean-up activities. 

Alternative A would maintain the current level of management and use of the refuge. Alternative B 

would expand resource management and habitat restoration activities into additional areas of the 

refuge, including the former Eastern Maneuver Area. Alternative C would provide for management 

activities and limited public uses on portions of the currently closed area, as well as within the 

currently open areas. Under Alternatives B and C, prior to opening any new areas for resource 

management or public uses, certification that the areas are cleared of unexploded ordnance or other 

contaminants would be required. 

In addition to the existing unexploded ordnance and other potential contaminants being cleaned 

under the “Superfund” program, there is a potential for minor contamination from Service 

management programs and public use activities. Under all alternatives, management and 

maintenance activities would create a potential for fuel or lubricant spills. Alternative B would involve 

increased uses of heavy equipment and potentially pesticides and herbicides associated with habitat 

management and invasive species control. Alternative C would also increase the use of equipment 

and potentially chemical control methodologies, along with providing for increased public uses. 

These activities would increase the likelihood of spills of fuels, lubricants, pesticides, herbicides, and 

human waste. Applying Best Management Practices to all habitat improvement projects, strictly 

adhering to label requirements for application of any pesticides, providing sanitary facilities, and 

regulating public use activities should minimize the potential for measurable impacts from these 

potential contaminants. With appropriate adherence to applicable regulations, any effects should be 

short-term, minor, and local. 
164 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

AESTHETICS 

All of the alternatives would provide for modifications to the entrances and roadways accessing the 

eastern and western refuge lands. During construction of fences, gates, roads, and kiosks, 

aesthetics at these sites would be adversely affected by construction material, debris, equipment, and 

work crews. These impacts should be limited to the immediate project areas and be short-term, 

minor-to-moderate, and local. 

Under Alternatives B and C, visitor and maintenance facilities would be constructed in the vicinity of 

Camp Garcia. Alternative C would have a greater impact on aesthetics, since the facilities would be 

larger and construction would take place over a longer period of time. Habitat management projects 

would be greatest under Alternative B, with a concurrent impact from clearing of non-native 

vegetation and preparing areas for replanting. The most significant rehabilitation and development of 

roads and trails would occur with the implementation of Alternative C. These would include an 

automobile route around the western refuge lands; a trail through the old-growth forest at Monte 

Pirata; observation towers on both eastern and western lands; and biking, hiking, and vehicle routes 

on the eastern lands. The impacts from construction of these projects would be short-term, minor-tomoderate, and local. On sites with permanent facilities for staff or visitor uses, such as the 

office/maintenance/visitor center complex, parking, observation towers and kiosks, impacts would be 

long-term, moderate, and local. 

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

Fauna 

The limited management with protection of existing habitats under Alternative A would have a minor 

beneficial impact on resident and migratory birds, including doves, pigeons, and waterfowl. Under 

Alternatives B and C, these species would be surveyed and populations would be monitored to 

determine if any or all could support a viable hunting program. Hunting would be permitted in 

accordance with an approved plan that would address the species to be hunted, compliance with 

commonwealth regulations, and any necessary special regulations to ensure a sustainable program. 

Under a managed-hunt program, long-term impacts to the species would be negligible. Short-term, 

minor impacts from the presence of hunters and disturbance from shooting would affect both target 

and non-target species in the areas where hunting was taking place. 

The removal of introduced predators (e.g., mongoose, cats and dogs) and grazing animals (e.g., 

horses and cows) will have minor to moderate beneficial effects for prey species, such as ground 

nesting birds and sea turtles. Alternative A only addresses having owners remove feral animals; 

whereas, Alternatives B and C would involve additional efforts implemented by Service employees to 

remove introduced or feral animals. Short-term minor impacts from disturbance during trapping or 

roundup activities may occur. These impacts would be greater under Alternatives B and C than 

Alternative A. 

Harvesting of land crabs has been included as an experimental program under all of the alternatives. 

Continuation of the program after evaluation and a determination of sustainability could have minor 

impacts on the habitat, such as trampling and cutting of brush to provide access. 

 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 165

Lagoon openings are presumed to have beneficial effects from increased flushing, improved circulation, 

and healthier fringing mangroves in the lagoon areas. Minor negative impacts to the coastal habitats 

could occur where the openings are constructed. Any negative effects are expected to be short-term, 

minor, and local. Any impacts, either beneficial or negative, would be greatest under Alternative B, 

since more emphasis would be placed on opening lagoons under that alternative. 

Construction of an office maintenance area and visitor facilities, maintenance of roads and trails, and 

the development of observation towers, parking, and informational kiosks would result in losses of 

habitat for resident and migratory birds. This habitat loss would be greatest under Alternative C, 

which includes more facilities than either of the other alternatives. Impacts from these projects would 

be long-term, minor-to-moderate, and local. Alternative C has expanded public uses and increased 

access to a greater portion of the refuge, thus increasing the potential for disturbance of animals in 

and adjacent to the public use areas. 

Flora 

Alternative A would have a negligible impact on the refuge flora, since there would be little change in 

the factors that affect it. The level of habitat management and manipulation would be greatest in 

Alternative B, with a focus on reducing non-native and invasive species, while reintroducing and 

providing habitat conditions favorable to native species. This alternative would provide for 

experimental reforestation plots, opening of lagoons to increase flushing of some mangrove areas, 

and planting of selected sites with native species. It is expected that Alternative B would provide 

long-term, moderate beneficial effects to the vegetative community. 

Alternative C would provide some of the same beneficial effects but would also result in increased 

public uses and development of visitor facilities (e.g., roads, trails, visitor center, and parking). 

Although there would be fewer sites actively managed for restoration of plant communities than in 

Alternative B, it is anticipated that there would be a long-term, moderate, refuge-wide, beneficial 

effect from this alternative. In the vicinity of construction and demolition projects, the impacts would 

be short-term, minor, and local. Within the immediate footprint of project sites (e.g., roads, trails, 

buildings, and parking areas), impacts to the flora would be long-term, moderate, and local. 

Threatened, Endangered, and Rare Species 

One focus of the management programs for the refuge is the protection and enhancement of 

threatened, endangered, and rare species. All alternatives are expected to benefit these species. 

Alternative A provides the least management of these species and their habitat but would still provide 

for sea turtle monitoring and surveys of roseate terns, Virgn Island tree boas, and listed plants to 

monitor population trends. 

Although the overall long-term impact of the alternatives would be neutrally to moderately beneficial 

throughout the refuge, specific development projects and management activities would have a 

potential for short-term, minor negative impacts to some of the species in a localized area. Clearing 

of project sites for construction of the office/visitor center/maintenance complex, visitor contact 

facilities, observation towers, roads, trails, and parking could impact listed or rare plant species. In 

addition, some of the habitat management activities proposed under Alternatives B and C have a 

potential for negative consequences for both plant and animal species. These activities include: 

removal of invasive plant species using mechanical methods, herbicides, or prescribed burning (if 

determined to be compatible) and opening of lagoon entrances, which could affect sea turtle nesting 

habitat. In addition, disturbance of birds and sea turtles during monitoring activities could have shortterm, minor impacts on these species. 
166 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS 

Archaeological and Historical Resources 

Under all alternatives, the cultural resource values of Vieques Refuge would be treated according to 

the regulations of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). To comply with this 

Act and to evaluate any effects of proposed activities, surveys, reporting, and consultation with the 

Service’s Regional Archaeologist and the State Historic Preservation Office are required for each 

project that has the potential to affect historic properties. Under all alternatives the Service will seek 

agreements with commonwealth agencies or non-governmental organizations to aid in the 

stabilization, restoration, and protection of historic and archaeological sites. Many activities proposed 

in the alternatives, such as beach use, education and interpretation activities, fishing, 

invasive/noxious plant control, and wildlife-dependent recreation, are unlikely to affect cultural 

resources. Cultural resources are sensitive to ground-disturbing types of activities. Potentially 

negative impacts to cultural resources could occur as a result of construction of facilities, clearing for 

habitat restoration or fire breaks, development of new trails, and forest management activities. 

The known sites where management and development activities might impact cultural resources 

include the Puerto Ferro lighthouse, remains of sugar plantation structures on both eastern and 

western refuge lands, and prehistoric sites containing petroglyphs and middens. Effects to cultural 

resources vary between the alternatives and are dependent on the level of direct management of 

these resources and other development that may affect the archaeological or historic site. Under 

Alternative A, there would be very limited development or management activities that would cause 

ground disturbance or otherwise directly impact known or potential sites. Alternative B would provide 

interpretation related to some of the sites and would provide for habitat management that might 

impact cultural resources. Alternative C provides for a proactive approach to management of the 

cultural resources with the collection of complete cultural resource information and stabilization of the 

Puerto Ferro lighthouse. Although Alternative C proposes additional trails and facilities, the majority 

of these would be located on previously disturbed sites (e.g., hiking, biking, and interpretive trails 

would use existing service roads). Any new facilities at previously unused sites would require 

surveys and consultations to comply with requirements of the NHPA. After compliance with the 

regulations, it is anticipated that negative impacts to cultural resources from implementation of any of 

the alternatives would be short-term, minor, and local. Alternative C could provide long-term, 

beneficial effects for the cultural resources. 

Employment 

The staffing and budgets for administration of the refuge affect the local economy both directly 

through jobs and salaries of the employees and indirectly through expenditures made in the 

community. Other impacts on employment result from tourism, and researchers and contract 

personnel who come to the area to conduct work activities. Table 10 provides estimates of the 

annual budgets for the administration of the refuge programs under the different alternatives. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 167

Table 10. Potential economic effects of alternatives 

Potential Economic Effects 

Alternatives 

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

Direct Employment (jobs) 11 21 25 

Total Salaries and Benefits $567,000 $1,040,000 $1,312,000

Approximate Annual Refuge 

Operating Expenses $140,000 * $260,000 * $305,000 *

Total Direct Benefits $707,000 $1,300,000 $1,617,000

*Does not include capital expenditures 

Public Uses 

All alternatives provide for a continuation of the current public use activities on the refuge. 

Alternatives A and B would maintain beach and fishing access and provide limited improvements to 

the facilities (e.g., upgrade entrance and access roads and provide directional and informational 

signing). In addition to the improvements in Alternatives A and B, Alternative C would provide for 

expanded hours of access, additional roads, trails and beaches would be opened, and a visitor 

center, kiosks, and improved fishing access would be developed. Both Alternatives B and C would 

evaluate the potential for hunting of doves, pigeons, and waterfowl and, where appropriate, areas 

would be opened for these activities. Interpretation and environmental education programs would be 

minimal under Alternatives A and B, but would be expanded significantly with Alternative C. Camping 

would not be permitted with Alternative A, would be associated with environmental education 

activities with Alternative B, and, if compatible, could be expanded to include limited recreational 

activities under Alternative C. 

Overall, public uses and their impacts on the socioeconomic setting of Vieques would be essentially 

unchanged with Alternative A, would increase slightly with Alternative B, while Alternative C would 

provide for increases in both wildlife-dependent and compatible non-wildlife dependent recreational 

opportunities. The increased uses identified in Alternative C could have both positive and negative 

socioeconomic impacts. Positive aspects would include increased recreational opportunities for local 

residents and increased tourism with the associated financial benefits to the community. Negative 

effects include increased traffic, exhaust, noise, congestion, trash, and demand for goods and 

services that could result in escalation of prices. 

The impacts from Alternatives A or B would be long-term, minor and local; whereas, impacts from 

Alternative C would likely be long-term, moderate, and local. 

MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE INCORPORATED IN ALL ALTERNATIVES 

The development of an effective refuge management program that includes wildlife habitat restoration, 

public use activities, and facilities to support these programs will, of necessity, result in some adverse 

impacts on the resources and potential conflicts among the users. During the development of the 

proposed alternatives, the planning team attempted to avoid unnecessary impacts, while providing for 

the development of programs that would benefit both the resources and the public. 
168 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

The following measures have been developed in an effort to minimize the potential impacts from the 

strategies implemented under any of the alternatives. Some of these mitigation measures are 

standard operating procedure for projects developed on Fish and Wildlife Service lands, while others 

are unique to this proposal. 

y The Service would apply “best management practices” to all construction activities. 

y To minimize the potential impacts from the development of roads and trails, the Service is 

proposing to utilize existing roads for these purposes rather than create new ones. 

y Whenever lagoons are opened to improve flushing, water quality and habitat responses would 

be monitored and management adapted, as necessary, to mitigate any adverse environmental 

responses. 

y All projects would be conducted in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act. 

y Prior to initiation of projects, surveys of construction and habitat management sites for 

threatened, endangered, or rare species would be conducted to determine if there is a 

potential for any of the species being present. 

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 

Cumulative impacts are actions that may be generated by various entities, including other federal or 

state agencies, local agencies, non-governmental organizations, and private landowners, as each of 

these groups undertakes actions related to land uses. Increased public use activities on the refuge 

along with additional uses at the Sun Bay facilities, tourism and development throughout the island 

will cumulatively result in increased demand for water, electricity, roads, lodging and other 

infrastructure. The combined impacts of all activities will affect the community and the ability of the 

local government to provide services. Similarly, the human activities throughout the island will result 

in alterations to the wildlife and habitats available. The exchange of “parcel C” for other lands would 

permit the development of “parcel C” for community benefit projects that may adversely affect the 

wildlife resources of that site, however, under the Service’s current policy, other lands would be 

transferred in the Refuge System for protection and management by the refuge. 

SHORT-TERM USE VERSUS LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 

Short-term and long-term effects describe the relationship between local short-term uses of the 

human environment and maintenance of long-term productivity of the environment. All of the 

alternatives are clearly aimed at enhancing the long-term productivity and sustainability of natural 

resources on the refuge. To varying degrees, the alternatives propose to implement actions that 

promote the restoration of the natural environment of the refuge, while providing varying levels of 

public uses of the resources. Outreach and environmental education are a priority in Alternative C 

and encourage refuge visitors to be better stewards of the environment. 

General impacts on biological resources from any of the alternatives are expected to be long-term 

and beneficial. Habitat for threatened and endangered species, such as sea turtle nesting beaches 

and listed plant habitats, would receive high priority for restoration. Neotropical migratory bird habitat 

would also be protected and restored. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 169

Although the environmental and visitor programs proposed for the refuge are not expected to attract 

massive numbers of visitors, in the long run, the local economy would be impacted positively by 

increased spending on these programs and visitor services. The programs would attract visitors and 

increase tourism and wildlife-dependent recreation. Enhanced interpretation and education about the 

wildlife resources within the ecosystem would lead to better public understanding and support for the 

restoration and protection of natural resources that support people and wildlife. 

The development of visitor center facilities, trails, observation platforms and kiosks, and 

visitor/educational facilities would result in both short-term and long-term physical impacts on soil and 

vegetation. These impacts would be localized and confined to the immediate construction sites. 

Increased attention to environmental education and recreation programs would result in more 

audiences being involved with environmental education and wildlife-dependent recreation, and a 

more positive ethic of land stewardship throughout the refuge vicinity. 

Long-term beneficial effects of implementation of Alternative B or C, and to a lesser degree 

Alternative A, include an increased productivity of neotropical migratory bird habitat, protection of 

threatened and endangered species, shorebird and waterfowl habitat, and other species dependent 

upon refuge habitats. The public would also gain long-term opportunities for wildlife-dependent 

recreation and education. 

Short-term uses of refuge lands include hunting, fishing, management for selected species, wildlife 

inventories, water-quality monitoring, forest regeneration, prescribed burning, and the construction of 

administration and public use facilities. These activities would be implemented with the primary goal 

of assuring the sustained productivity of refuge resources.

UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS 

Unavoidable adverse impacts are projected from the changes in levels of management activities as 

described in Alternatives B and C relative to the current management alternative (Alternative A). 

Construction of visitor facilities and increased visitation would affect local air and water quality and 

natural vegetation through vehicle emissions, localized damage to vegetation, and soil compaction. 

Disturbance to wildlife is an unavoidable consequence of any development or expanded public use 

program, regardless of the activity involved. Some activities have a potential to be more disturbing 

than others. For example, human activity and lights at night on sea turtle nesting beaches could 

cause turtles to abandon nesting attempts. Although many public use activities would be permitted, 

the management goal is to provide a balance and to monitor activities to ensure that unacceptable 

levels of impact do not occur. 

Increased visitation resulting from program and facilities development would result in additional 

disturbances to both resident and migratory wildlife. The construction of roads, trails, buildings, visitor 

and management facilities and the manipulation of habitats to encourage native species and reduce 

exotic vegetation would result in the loss or alteration of existing habitats. The short-term alterations 

and the long-term losses would occur on very small portions of the refuge and should not result in 

significant permanent impacts. 

Unavoidable impacts to the local community would occur due to an increase in tourists to the island. 

The potential adverse impacts include increased traffic, competition for public transportation (e.g., 

airline service, ferry, and taxi) and possibly greater difficulty in obtaining consumer goods during 

periods of high visitation. 
170 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

If “parcel C” is transferred out of the Refuge System, those lands (approximately 98 acres) would likely be 

developed for community benefit projects, resulting in a loss of wildlife habitat and, at the same time, a 

social benefit for the community. An exchange of lands, as is required under current Service policy, would 

result in the Service obtaining lands having wildlife values comparable to those being lost. 

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES 

The use of non-renewable resources is irreversible. Minerals and fossil fuels are not renewable and 

therefore any that are utilized during the construction of roads, trails, and facilities, and during 

implementation of management programs, would not be available for future use. Likewise, an 

irreversible commitment of resources results when an area is altered in such a way that it cannot be 

returned to its natural condition for an extended period of time. The lands and habitats occupied by 

roads, trails, and facilities would constitute an irreversible and irretrievable commitment of these 

resources. Management of refuge lands acquired would result in an irreversible and irretrievable 

commitment of funding for operations, administration, and management. Funding and personnel 

commitments by the Service to develop and manage refuge lands and facilities render those 

resources unavailable for other Service programs and projects. Table 11 gives a comparison of the 

funding needs for each of the alternatives. 

Animal and plant communities are renewable in different degrees. Construction sites, and some 

habitat management practices, may irretrievably alter natural communities, at least for a period of 

time. Wildlife taken through hunting, fishing, or nuisance control is not available for wildlife 

observation, photography, or consumptive uses by others. Since these activities are managed to 

ensure the health and viability of the overall wildlife populations, the species and other uses of the 

resources should not be irreversibly threatened. 

Table 11. Comparison of funding needs by alternative 

Items Funding Needs by Alternative (in thousands) 

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

Total Salaries and Benefits 567 1,040 1,312

Approximate Annual Refuge Operating 

Expenses 140 260 305 

Projects Costs (one time* or annual** in addition to staff and operating expenses) 

East Entrance * 30 30 30 

Boundary Fence * 411 411 411 

Directional Signing* 60 60 100 

Rehab Utilities* 100 100 100 

Lagoon Restoration** 40 80 40 

Mangrove Restoration** 25 100 100 

Upland Forest Restoration** 0 100 100 

Fire Management Equipment* 100 120 120 

Invasive Plant Control** 0 25 25 

Feral Animal Control** 0 10 10 

Sea Turtle Program** 25 75 50 

Plant Surveys/Propagation* 25 100 100 

Waterbird Management** 5 15 15 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 171

Items Funding Needs by Alternative (in thousands) 

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

Upland Bird Management** 5 15 15 

Beach Facilities* Composting Toilets 0 125 125 

Road Upgrade (East)* † 7,900 20,000 20,000 

Road Upgrade (West)* † 0 1,700 1,700 

Improve Boat Launch Sites* 0 0 150 

Parking Upgrade (Existing Sites)* Included in road upgrade projects east and west 

Environmental Education Program** 30 50 75 

Historic Site Stabilization* 0 0 1,400 

Historic Site Interpretive Signing* 0 0 30 

Historic Site Restoration* 0 0 4,700 

Equipment Needs* 

List 

See updated 

SAMMS and 

RONS lists 

See updated 

SAMMS and 

RONS lists 

See updated 

SAMMS and 

RONS lists 

Office/Visitor Center/Maintenance 

Complex* 0 2,500 4,000 

Upgraded Boardwalk Trail and Kiosk at 

Kiani* 0 5 15 

Visitor Information Kiosks East and 

West* 0 30 30 

Interpretive Trails (East) (Hiking, 

Equestrian, and Biking)* 0 0 140 

Monte Pirata “Old-growth Interpretive 

Trail” with Parking* 0 0 150 

† Road Upgrade funding to be provided by TEA 21 and Emergency Relief Funds. 
172 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Table 12. Comparison of environmental consequences 

Environmental effects change from Alternative A (no-action alternative). This analysis provides a 

comparison of the effects of implementation of either Alternative B or Alternative C with the effects 

that could be expected from Alternative A. 

AREA OF CONCERN / 

MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY Alternative B Alternative C 

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 

Soil Resources 

Forest restoration, invasive species 

control, lagoon opening 

Short-term, minor Short-term, minor 

Construction of facilities, roads and 

trails 

Long-term, minor Long-term, moderate 

Hydrology and Water Quality 

Lagoon opening, habitat 

management 

Long-term, minor Long-term, minor 

Increased beach uses, public use 

facilities 

Long-term, minor Long-term, minor 

Air Quality 

Roads, trails increased traffic Short-term, minor Short-term, minor 

Habitat management, prescribed 

burning 

Short-term, moderate Short-term, moderate 

Contaminants/Hazardous Material 

Public uses, habitat management, 

maintenance activities (does not 

include consideration of Navy clean 

up activities) 

Short-term, minor Short-term, minor 

Aesthetics 

Development of facilities, parking, 

kiosks, towers etc. 

Long-term, minor-tomoderate Long-term, moderate 

Fauna/ Resident and migratory birds/ 

Lagoon opening Short-term, minor, 

beneficial 

Short-term, minor, 

beneficial 

Road, trail, parking, facilities 

development, etc. 

Long-term, minor Long-term, moderate 

Mongoose, cat, dog, horse and 

cattle removal 

Long-term, moderate 

beneficial 

Long-term, moderate 

Beneficial 

Land crab harvest Short-term, minor Short-term, minor 

Hunting Short-term, minor Short-term minor 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 173

AREA OF CONCERN / 

MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY Alternative B Alternative C 

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 

Flora 

Habitat management Long-term, moderate, 

beneficial 

Long-term, moderate, 

beneficial 

Road, trail, parking, facilities 

development, etc. 

Long-term, minor Long-term, minor 

Threatened, Endangered and Rare Species 

Habitat management Long-term, moderate, 

beneficial 

Long-term, moderate, 

beneficial 

Roads, trails, facilities development, 

invasive species control, prescribed 

burning, surveys and monitoring. 

Short-term, minor Short-term, minor 

SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS 

Archaeological and Historical Resources 

Road, trail, parking, facilities 

development, etc. 

Short-term, minor Short-term, minor 

Cultural resource surveys and 

agreement 

Neutral Long-term, moderate, 

beneficial 

Environmental Justice 

 No Change No Change 

Employment 

Staff increases Long-term, minor Long-term, minor 

Public Uses 

Consumptive and non-consumptive 

recreational uses 

Long-term, minor Long-term, moderate 
174 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 175

V. Consultation and Coordination 

The primary development of the CCP/EIS was accomplished by the core planning team that was 

established early in the planning process. This team is composed of Fish and Wildlife Service 

personnel from the Divisions of Refuges, Ecological Services, and a representative from the 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources who serves as a liaison with other 

commonwealth representatives having an interest in refuge planning activities. All of the members of 

the core team work in Puerto Rico or are very familiar with the Vieques Refuge and its natural and 

cultural resources. Table 13 provides a listing of the core team members and their primary functions 

on the team. 

Table 13. Vieques Refuge core planning team 

NAME TITLE LOCATION TEAM FUNCTION 

Susan Silander, 

Fish and Wildlife 

Service 

Manager, 

Caribbean 

Islands National 

Wildlife Refuge 

Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Plan development, management 

direction, coordination with 

cooperating agencies, review, and 

editing. 

Oscar Diaz, Fish 

and Wildlife 

Service 

Manager, 

Vieques National 

Wildlife Refuge 

Vieques, Puerto 

Rico 

Plan development, management 

direction, coordination with 

cooperating agencies, review, and 

editing. 

Mike Barandiaran, 

Fish and Wildlife 

Service 

Assistant 

Manager, 

Vieques National 

Wildlife Refuge 

Vieques, Puerto 

Rico 

Plan development and biological 

alternatives. 

Gisella Burgos, 

Fish and Wildlife 

Service 

Interpretive 

Specialist, 

Vieques National 

Wildlife Refuge 

Vieques, Puerto 

Rico 

Plan development, public use 

alternatives, and meeting 

coordination. 

Joseph 

Schwagerl, Fish 

and Wildlife 

Service 

Assistant 

Manager, 

Caribbean 

Islands National 

Wildlife Refuge 

Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Plan development, resource 

background, editing, and 

alternatives’ development. 

James Oland, Fish 

and Wildlife 

Service 

Special Assistant, 

Refuges 

Annapolis, 

Maryland 

Team organization, writing, and 

plan editing. 
176 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

NAME TITLE LOCATION TEAM FUNCTION 

Rosa Maria 

Quiles, 

Department of 

Natural and 

Environmental 

Resources 

Natural Resource 

Planner 

San Juan, Puerto 

Rico 

Plan development, coordination with 

commonwealth personnel, 

background, and socioeconomic 

information. 

Karen Torres, Fish 

and Wildlife 

Service 

Information 

Technology 

Specialist 

Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Plan development, and GIS data 

layer preparation. 

Marelisa Rivera, 

Fish and Wildlife 

Service 

Wildlife Biologist Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Plan development, endangered 

species background, alternatives’ 

development, and editing. 

Felix Lopez, Fish 

and Wildlife 

Service 

Ecologist Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Plan development, contaminants, 

wetlands, and alternatives’ 

development. 

Public involvement process: Public scoping was conducted through the following formal events: 

Open House - July 10, 2004 (approximately 600 attended) 

Public Scoping Meeting - August 19, 2004 (25 attended) 

Public Scoping Meeting - November 10, 2004 (49 attended) 

The Open House was planned to provide the public with general information about the Fish and Wildlife 

Service, the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge, and the upcoming process for development of the 

comprehensive conservation plan. The Public Scoping meetings were announced locally through news 

releases, flyers, and contacts with community organizations. Each meeting began with an opportunity for 

guests to visit a selection of refuge exhibits and speak with the planning team members and refuge staff. 

This was followed by a brief staff presentation about the refuge, the Refuge System, and the planning 

process. Members of the public were then provided an opportunity to identify issues, make comments, 

and ask questions before the group. During each of the public events, the public was provided an 

opportunity and encouraged to identify issues and provide written comments to be used during the 

development of the alternatives. A total of 78 written comments were received. 

In addition to the public scoping activities, approximately 15 agencies and community organizations, 

representing approximately 200 individuals, were provided presentations on the plan’s development and 

were given an opportunity to provide comments and identify issues. Comment forms were provided at the 

public forums, were placed at local businesses throughout the community and at the refuge headquarters, 

and were provided to persons who made inquiries through the Internet, by mail, and in person. 

Additional efforts to keep the community informed and to solicit input have been through press coverage 

of public events, a paid announcement of the public meeting and three radio interviews, information 

provided for a local web page, and publication and distribution of a planning update flyer. 

The Sea Grant College Program of the University of Puerto Rico is conducting a survey of Vieques 

residents to determine their knowledge, perceptions, and desired uses of the refuge. 
Section A. Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan/EIS 177

The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Navy, and the General Services Administration agreed to work 

with the Service during the development of the NEPA documentation associated with the planning 

process. This role was fulfilled primarily during the internal review process when the agencies provided 

review, comments, and information to facilitate the preparation of the public review draft document. 

In 2002, a Biological Review of the Caribbean Islands National Wildlife Refuge was completed. At 

that time, approximately 3,100 acres on western Vieques lands had been transferred to the Service 

and were considered in the review. Recommendations from that document were considered and 

incorporated into this CCP/EIS. The members of the Biological Review Team, their positions and 

their areas of expertise are provided in Table 14. 

Table 14. Caribbean Islands National Wildlife Refuge biological review team 

Caribbean Islands National Wildlife Refuge Biological Review Team 

Team Member Position Expertise 

Chuck Hunter Non-game Migratory Bird 

Coordinator, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Atlanta, Georgia 

Birds 

Marelisa Rivera Biologist, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Endangered Species 

Jorge Saliva Biologist, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Endangered Species, Birds 

Leopoldo Miranda Biologist, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Birds 

Susan Silander Refuge Manager, Caribbean 

Islands National Wildlife 

Refuge, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Plants, Reptiles, Amphibians, 

Land Acquisition, Protection 

Claudia Lombard Biologist, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Sandy Point National 

Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Virgin 

Islands 

Reptiles, Amphibians 

Amy Mackay Biological Technician, Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Sandy Point 

National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. 

Virgin Islands 

Reptiles, Amphibians 
178 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Caribbean Islands National Wildlife Refuge Biological Review Team 

Team Member Position Expertise 

Cal Garnett Assistant Refuge Supervisor, 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Atlanta, Georgia 

Bats 

Joseph Schwagerl Refuge Manager, Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Boquerón, 

Puerto Rico 

Dry Forest, Fire Management 

C. Watson Wetland Restoration 

Stephen Earsom Refuge Biologist, Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Boquerón, 

Puerto Rico 

Invasive Species 

Keith Watson Non-game Migratory Bird 

Biologist, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Manteo, North 

Carolina 

Bird inventories, Monitoring 

Felix Lopez Ecologist, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Contaminants, Unexploded 

Ordnance 

Margaret Miller Coral Reef Scientist, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, Miami, Florida 

Corals, Marine Habitats 

Beverly Yoshioka Biologist, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Boquerón, Puerto 

Rico 

Aquatic Invertebrates, Corals, 

Fisheries 
Section B. Appendices 179

SECTION B. APPENDICES 

 

 

APPENDIX I. GLOSSARY 

Adaptive Management A process in which projects are implemented within a framework of 

scientifically driven experiments to test predictions and assumptions 

outlined within the comprehensive conservation plan. The analysis of 

the outcome of project implementation helps managers determine 

whether current management should continue as is or whether it should 

be modified to achieve desired conditions. 

Alternative A different means of accomplishing refuge purposes, goals, and 

objectives and contributing to the National Wildlife Refuge System. An 

alternative is a reasonable way to fix the identified problem or satisfy 

the stated need. 

Appropriate Use A proposed or existing use of a national wildlife refuge that (1) supports 

the Refuge System Mission, the major purposes, goals, or objectives of 

the refuge; (2) is necessary for the safe and effective conduct of a 

priority general public use on the refuge; (3) is otherwise determined 

under Service Manual Chapter 605 FW1 (draft), by the refuge manager 

and refuge supervisor to be appropriate. 

Approved Acquisition 

Boundary A project boundary that the Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service 

approves upon completion of the detailed planning and environmental 

compliance process. 

Biological Diversity The variety of life and its processes, including the variety of living 

organisms, the genetic differences among them, and the communities 

and ecosystems in which they occur. The National Wildlife Refuge 

System focus is on indigenous species, biotic communities, and 

ecological processes.

Biological Integrity The biotic composition, structure, and functioning at genetic, organism, 

and community levels comparable with historic conditions including the 

natural biological processes that shape genomes, organisms, and 

communities. 

Buffer Zones Protective land borders around critical habitats or water bodies that 

reduce runoff and nonpoint source pollution loading; areas created or 

sustained to lessen the negative effects of land development on 

animals and plants and their habitats. 

Carrying Capacity The size of the population that can be sustained by a given 

environment. 
180 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Categorical Exclusion A category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human environment and have been found to 

have no such effect in procedures adopted by a federal agency 

pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations. 

Compatible Use A wildlife-dependent recreational use or any other use of a refuge that, 

in the sound professional judgment of the refuge manager, will not 

materially interfere with, or detract from, the fulfillment of the mission or 

the purposes of the refuge. A compatibility determination supports the 

selection of compatible uses and identifies stipulations or limits 

necessary to ensure compatibility. 

Compatibility Determination A compatibility determination is required for a wildlife-dependent 

recreational use or any other public use of a refuge. A compatible use 

is one which, in the sound professional judgment of the refuge 

manager, will not materially interfere with or detract from fulfillment of 

the Refuge System mission or refuge purpose(s). 

Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan A document that describes the desired future conditions of the refuge; 

provides long-range guidance and management direction for the refuge 

manager to accomplish the purposes, goals, and objectives of the 

refuge; and contributes to the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System and meets relevant mandates. 

Conservation Easement A legal document that provides specific land-use rights to a secondary 

party. A perpetual conservation easement usually grants conservation 

and management rights to a party in perpetuity. 

Cooperative Agreement A legal instrument used when the principle purpose of the transaction is 

the transfer of money, property, services, or anything of value to a 

recipient in order to accomplish a public purpose authorized by federal 

statute and substantial involvement between the Service and the 

recipient is anticipated. 

Corridor A route that allows movement of individuals from one region or place to 

another. 

Cover Type The present vegetation of an area. 

Cultural Resources The remains of sites, structures, or objects used by people of the past. 

Database A collection of data arranged for ease and speed of analysis and 

retrieval, usually computerized. 

Ecological Succession The orderly progression of an area through time in the absence of 

disturbance from one vegetative community to another. 
Section B. Appendices 181

Ecosystem A dynamic and interrelated complex of plant and animal communities 

and their associated non-living environment. 

Ecosystem Management Management of natural resources using systemwide concepts to ensure 

that all plants and animals in ecosystems are maintained at viable 

levels in native habitats and basic ecosystem processes are 

perpetuated indefinitely. 

Ecotourism A type of tourism that maintains and conserves natural resources as a 

basis for promoting economic growth and development resulting from 

visitation to an area. 

Environmental Health The composition, structure, and functioning of soil, water, air, and other 

abiotic features comparable with historic conditions, including the 

natural abiotic processes that shape the environment. 

Endangered Species A plant or animal species listed under the Endangered Species Act that 

is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 

range. 

Endemic Species Plants or animals that occur naturally in a certain region and whose 

distribution is relatively limited to a particular locality. 

Environmental Impact 

Statement A detailed written statement required by section 102(2)(C) of the 

National Environmental Policy Act, analyzing the environmental impacts 

of a proposed action, adverse effects of the project that cannot be 

avoided, alternative courses of action, short-term uses of the 

environment versus the maintenance and enhancement of long-term 

productivity, and any irreversible and irretrievable commitment of 

resources (40 CFR 1508.11). 

Fauna All the vertebrate or invertebrate animals of an area. 

Federal Trust Species All species where the Federal Government has primary jurisdiction 

including federally threatened or endangered species, migratory birds, 

anadromous fish, and certain marine mammals. 

Finding of No 

Significant Impact A document prepared in compliance with the National Environmental 

Policy Act, supported by an environmental assessment that briefly 

presents why a federal action will have no significant effect on the 

human environment and for which an environmental impact statement, 

therefore, will not be prepared. 

Geographic Information 

System A computer system capable of storing and manipulating spatial data. 

Goal Descriptive, open-ended, and often broad statements of desired future 

conditions that convey a purpose but does not define measurable units. 
182 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Habitat The place where a particular type of plant or animal lives. An 

organism’s habitat must provide all of the basic requirements for life and 

should be free of harmful contaminants. 

Historic Conditions These are the composition, structure, and functioning of ecosystems 

resulting from natural processes that we believe, based on sound 

professional judgment, were present prior to substantial human-related 

changes to the landscape. 

Indicator Species A species of plant or animals that is assumed to be sensitive to habitat 

changes and represents the needs of a larger group of species. 

Issue Any unsettled matter that requires a management decision; e.g., a 

Service initiative, an opportunity, a management problem, a threat to 

the resources of the unit, a conflict in uses, a public concern, or the 

presence of an undesirable resource condition. Issues should be 

documented, described, and analyzed in the plan even if resolution 

cannot be accomplished during the planning process. 

Management Plan A plan that guides future land management practices on a tract of land. 

Migratory The seasonal movement from one area to another and back. 

Mission Statement A succinct statement of the unit’s purpose and reason for being. 

Monitoring The process of collecting information to track changes of selected 

parameters over time. 

National Environmental 

Policy Act Requires all agencies, including the Service, to examine the 

environmental impacts of their actions, incorporate environmental 

information, and use public participation in the planning and 

implementation of all actions. Federal agencies must integrate this Act 

with other planning requirements, and prepare appropriate policy 

documents to facilitate better environmental decision-making. 

National Wildlife Refuge A designated area of land, water, or an interest in land or water within 

the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

National Wildlife 

Refuge System Various categories of areas administered by the Secretary of the 

Interior for the conservation of fish and wildlife, including species 

threatened with extinction, all lands, waters, and interests therein 

administered by the Secretary as wildlife refuges, wildlife ranges, game 

ranges, wildlife management areas, or waterfowl production areas. 

Native Species Species that normally live and thrive in a particular ecosystem. 

Neotropical Migratory Bird A bird species that breeds north of the United States/Mexican border 

and winters primarily south of that border. 
Section B. Appendices 183

Objective An objective is a concise quantitative (where possible) target statement 

of what will be achieved. Objectives are derived from goals and provide 

the basis for determining management strategies. Objectives should be 

attainable and time-specific. 

Partnership A contract or agreement entered into by two or more individuals, groups 

of individuals, or organizations or agencies in which each agrees to 

furnish a part of the capital or some in-kind service, i.e., labor, for a 

mutually beneficial enterprise. 

Planning Area A planning area may include lands outside existing planning unit 

boundaries that are being studied for inclusion in the unit and/or 

partnership planning efforts. It may also include watersheds or 

ecosystems that affect the planning area. 

Planning Team A planning team prepares the comprehensive conservation plan. 

Planning teams are interdisciplinary in membership and function. A 

team generally consists of the a planning team leader; refuge manager 

and staff biologists; staff specialists or other representatives of Service 

programs, ecosystems or regional offices; and state partnering wildlife 

agencies, as appropriate. 

Preferred Alternative This is the alternative determined by the decision-maker that will best 

achieve the refuge purpose, vision, and goals; contribute to the refuge 

system mission, address the significant issues; and is consistent with 

principles of sound fish and wildlife management. 

Proposed Action 

(or Proposed Alternative) The proposal for which an environmental impact statement or 

environmental assessment is being written; the alternative containing 

the actions and strategies recommended by the planning team. The 

proposed action is, for all practical purposes, the draft plan for the 

refuge. 

Purpose of the Refuge The purpose of the refuge is specified in or derived from the law, 

proclamation, executive order, agreement, public land order, donation 

document, or administrative memorandum establishing, authorizing, or 

expanding a refuge and refuge unit. 

Record of Decision (ROD) A concise public record of decision prepared by the federal agency, 

pursuant to NEPA, that contains a statement of the decision, 

identification of all alternatives considered, identification of the 

environmentally preferable alternative, a statement as to whether all 

practical means to avoid or minimize environmental harm from the 

alternative selected have been adopted (and if not, why they were not), 

and a summary of monitoring and enforcement where applicable for any 

mitigation. 
184 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Refuge Operating 

Needs System (RONS) This is a national database that contains the unfunded operational 

needs of each refuge. Projects included are those required to 

implement approved plans and meet goals, objectives, and legal 

mandates. 

Refuge Purposes The purposes specified in or derived from the law, proclamation, 

executive order, agreement, public land order, donation document, or 

administrative memorandum establishing, authorizing, or expanding a 

refuge, refuge unit, or refuge subunit. 

Service Asset Maintenance 

Management System 

(SAMMS) A web-based system designed to track maintenance needs for Fish and 

Wildlife Service-owned assets. 

Step-down Management 

Plans Step-down management plans provide the details necessary to 

implement management strategies and projects identified in the 

comprehensive conservation plan. 

Strategy A specific action, tool, or technique or combination of actions, tools, and 

techniques used to meet unit objectives. 

Threatened Species Species listed under the Endangered Species Act that likely are to 

become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a 

significant portion of their range. 

Trust Species Species for which the Fish and Wildlife Service has primary 

responsibility, including most federally listed threatened and 

endangered species, anadromous fish once they enter the inland 

coastal waterways, and migratory birds. 

Understory Any vegetation with canopy below or closer to the ground than canopies 

of other plants. 

Vision Statement A concise statement of what the planning unit should be, or what we 

hope to do, based primarily upon the Refuge System mission and 

specific refuge purposes, and other mandates (Service Manual, 602 FW 

1.5). 

Visitor Center A permanently staffed building offering exhibits and interpretive 

information to the visiting public. Some visitor centers are co-located 

with refuge offices and others include additional facilities, such as 

classrooms or wildlife viewing areas. 

Visitor Contact Station Compared to a visitor center, a contact station is a smaller facility that 

may not be permanently staffed. 
Section B. Appendices 185

Wildlife Corridor A landscape feature that facilitates the biologically effective transport of 

animals between larger patches of habitat dedicated to conservation 

functions. Such corridors may facilitate several kinds of traffic, including 

frequent foraging movement, seasonal migration, or the once-in-alifetime dispersal of juvenile animals. These are transition habitats and 

need not contain all habitat elements required by migratory animals for 

long-term survival or reproduction. 

Wildlife-Dependent 

Recreation A use of a refuge involving hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife 

photography, and environmental education and interpretation. The 

National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 specifies that 

these are the six priority general public uses of the Refuge System. 
186 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 187

APPENDIX II. REFERENCES AND 

LITERATURE CITED 

Atlas of the United States; Segment 13 Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

Hydrologic Investigations Atlas 730-N. United States Geological Survey. Reston, Virginia. 

Ayala C. and V. Carro. 2004." Expropiations and Displacement of Civilians in Vieques, 1940-1950," in 

Puerto Rico under Colonial Rule: Political Persecution and the Quest for Human Rights, 

edited by R. Bosque Pérez and J. Colón Morera (Forthcoming, S.U.N.Y. Press, May 2005). 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and G. Roman. 1991. 1991 Annual Report Vieques Island Sea Turtle 

Conservation Project with Management Recommendations. A Report to U.S. Naval Station 

Roosevelt Roads Naval Facilities Vieques, Puerto Rico. Department of Natural Resources, 

Puerta de Tierra, Puerto Rico. 37pp. 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and G. Roman. 1992. 1992 Annual Report Sea Turtle Conservation Project 

on Vieques Island. A Report to U.S. Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Naval Facilities Vieques, 

Puerto Rico. Department of Natural Resources, Puerta de Tierra, Puerto Rico. 29pp. 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and G. Roman. 1993. 1993 Annual Report Sea Turtle Conservation Project on 

Vieques Island. A Report to U.S. Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Naval Facilities Vieques, Puerto 

Rico. Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 23pp. 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and J.F. Sanez. 1994. 1994 Annual Report Sea Turtle Conservation Project on 

Vieques Island. A Report to U.S. Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Naval Facilities Vieques, Puerto 

Rico. Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 22pp. 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and F.J. Ortiz. 1995. 1995 Annual Report Sea Turtle Conservation Project on 

Vieques Island. A Report to U.S. Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Naval Facilities Vieques, Puerto 

Rico. Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 22pp. 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and F.J. Sanez. 1996. 1996 Annual Report Sea Turtle Conservation Project 

on Vieques Island. A Report to U.S. Naval Station, Roosevelt Roads Public Works 

Department Environmental Engineering Division. Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 18pp. 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and F.J. Ortiz. 1997. 1997 Annual Report Sea Turtle Conservation Project on 

Vieques Island. A Report to U.S. Naval Station, Roosevelt Roads Public Works Department 

Environmental Engineering Division. Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, 

San Juan, Puerto Rico. 10pp.. 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and F. Ortiz. 1999. 1998 Annual Report Sea Turtle Conservation Project on 

Vieques Island. A Report to U.S. Naval Station, Roosevelt Roads Public Works Department 

Environmental Engineering Division. Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, 

San Juan, Puerto Rico. 10pp.. 
188 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and F. Ortiz. 2000. 1999 Annual Report Sea Turtle Conservation Project on 

Vieques Island. A Report to U.S. Naval Station, Roosevelt Roads Public Works Department 

Environmental Engineering Division. Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, 

San Juan, Puerto Rico. 9pp.. 

Belardo, E., R. Matos, and F. Ortiz. 2001. 2000 Annual Report Sea Turtle Conservation Project on 

Vieques Island. A Report to U.S. Naval Station, Roosevelt Roads Public Works Department 

Environmental Engineering Division. Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, 

San Juan, Puerto Rico. 10pp.. 

Boccheciamp, R.A. 1977. Soil Survey of the Humacao Area of Eastern Puerto Rico. U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with University of Puerto Rico 

College of Agriculture Sciences. 

Breckon, G.J. 2007. Flora of Vieques; unfinished report to US Fish and Wildlife Service, Caribbean 

Islands National Wildlife Refuge Complex, Boquerón, PR. 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust and the U.S. Department of the 

Interior/Fish and Wildlife Service. November 2002. Management Plan for the Western 

Vieques Conservation Areas, Vieques Puerto Rico. 99pp. 

Causey, B., J. Delaney, E. Diaz, D. Dodge, J.R. Garcia, J. Higgins, W. Jaap, C.A. Matos, G.P. 

Schmahl, C. Rogers, M.W. Miller, and D. Turgeaon. 2000. Status of coral reefs in the US 

Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico: Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands and Navassa. 

In Status of coral reefs of the worlds: 2000, edited by C.R. Wilkinson. Australian Institute of 

Marine Science, Townsville, Australia. pp. 239-259. 

Estudios Técnicos Inc. December 2004. Plan Maestro para el Desarrollo Sustentable de Vieques. Parte 

I. Sometido a: Grupo Interagencial de Vieques y Culebra. San Juan, Puerto Rico. 212 pp. 

Estudios Técnicos Inc. December 2004. Plan Maestro para el Desarrollo Sustentable de Vieques. Parte 

II. Sometido a: Grupo Interagencial de Vieques y Culebra. San Juan, Puerto Rico. 180 pp 

Estudios Técnicos Inc. December 2004. Plan Maestro para el Desarrollo Sustentable de Vieques. Parte 

III. Sometido a: Grupo Interagencial de Vieques y Culebra. San Juan, Puerto Rico. 294 pp. 

Ewel, J.S. and J.L. Whitmore. 1973. Ecological life zones of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

USDA Forest Service. Res. Paper ITF-18. 72pp. 

Francis, J.K. and H.A. Liogier. 1991. Naturalized Exotic Tree Species in Puerto Rico. U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Southern Forest Experiment Station. General Technical Report 

SO-82. May. 

Geo-Marine, Inc. 2003. Final Draft Vieques INRMP (Integrated Natural Resources Management 

Plan). Plan Years 2003-2012. Prepared for Atlantic Division Naval Facilities Engineering 

Command Norfolk, Virginia. 

Glover, L. 1971. Geology of the Coamo Area, Puerto Rico, and its Relation to the Volcanic Arc 

Trench Association. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 636. 102 p. 
Section B. Appendices 189

LawGibb Group, 2000. Architectural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Naval Station Roosevelt 

Roads Naval Ammunitions Support Detachment (NASD) Vieques, Puerto Rico (Draft). San 

Juan, Puerto Rico. 

LawGibb Group, 2001. Architectural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Naval Station Roosevelt 

Roads Ceiba, Vieques & Culebra, Puerto Rico (2 Volumes). San Juan, Puerto Rico. 

Lewis, R. R., III, R. Callahan, G. D’Aluisio-Guerrieri, R. Lambardo, and B. Sorrie. 1981. Mangrove 

Forests of Vieques, Puerto Rico - Volume 1 Management Report. Report submitted to U.S. 

Navy. 42 p. 

Little, E.L., Jr. and F.H. Wadsworth. 1964. The Common Trees of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. 

Agricultural Handbook No. 249. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, 

D.C. July. 

Miller, J.A., R.L. Whitehead, S.B. Gingerich, D.S. Oki, and P.G. Olcott. 1999. Ground Water 

National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1991. Recovery Plan for U.S. 

Population of Atlantic Green Turtle. National Marine Fisheries Service, Washington, D.C. 

National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Recovery Plan for 

Leatherback Turtle in the U.S. Caribbean, Atlantic and Gilf of Mexico. National Marine 

Fisheries Service, Washington, D.C. 

National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Recovery Plan for 

Hawksbill Turtles in the U.S. Caribbean Sea, Atlantic Ocean, and Gulf of Mexico. National 

Marine Fisheries Service, St. Petersburg, Florida. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2000. Hurricanes, Typhoons, and Tropical 

Cyclones. Website: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/. 

Naval Station Roosevelt Roads (NSRR). 1996. Land Use Management Plan for U.S. Naval Facilities 

Vieques, Puerto Rico. Prepared by Geo-Marine, Inc., Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in cooperation 

with Atlantic Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command. 

Newsom, L.A., and E.S. Wing. 2004. On Land and Sea: Native American Uses of Biological 

Resources in the West Indies. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 

Proctor, G.R. 1994. Vieques Mangrove Forest Manual. Department of Natural Resources, San Juan, 

Puerto Rico. 72 p. 

Santiago-Valentin, E. and G. Rojas-Vázquez. 2001. Research on five threatened and endangered 

plant species of Puerto Rico: Calyptronoma rivalis, Daphnopsis helleriana, Schoepfia 

arenaria, Stahlia monosperma, and Zanthoxylum thomasianum. Final Report Cooperative 

Agreement No. 1448-0004-95-981 submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, 

Georgia. 151pp. 

Sorrie, B.A. 1978. Draft Report on the Birds of Vieques Island Puerto Rico – 1978. Report submitted 

to U.S. Navy. 31+ pp. 
190 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. Profiles of Characteristics: 2000. Vieques 

Municipio, Puerto Rico. Washington D.C. U.S. Government Printing Office. 

http://censtats.census.gov/data/PR/05072147.pdf

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1978. Annual progress report: Status and distribution of the yellowshouldered blackbird in Puerto Rico. Study plan 1 of the work unit 2 of Project P-H-VEndangered and Threatened Species of the Caribbean. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland. In U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

1996. Yellow-shouldered Blackbird (Agelaius xanthomus) Revised Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 77pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Recovery Plan for the Puerto Rico Population of the West 

Indian (Antillean) Manatee (Trichechus manatus manatus L.). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Atlanta, Georgia. 28pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Beautiful Goetzea Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 35pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Caribbean Roseate Tern Recovery Plan . U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 40pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Chamaecrista glandulosa var. mirabilis Recovery Plan. U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 18pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Stahlia monosperma (cóbana negra) Recovery Plan. U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 15pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1997. Calyptranthes thomasiana Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 17pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Caribbean Ecosystem Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Boquerón, Puerto Rico. 10 pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. Biological Opinion for Continuing Training Activities on the 

Inner Range, Vieques, Puerto Rico. Boquerón Field Office, Puerto Rico. 45pp. 

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. June 2003. Vieques National Wildlife Refuge. Visitor Services 

Review Report. Vieques, Puerto Rico. 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1982. Isla De Vieques, P.R. 7.5 Minute Quadrangle. Scale 1:30,000. 

U.S. Department of the Interior. 

Woodbury, R.O. 1972. Vegetation. In Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board, Vieques 1972 

Survey of the Natural Resources. San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Section B. Appendices 191

APPENDIX III. RELEVANT LEGAL 

MANDATES 

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM AUTHORITIES 

The mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service is to conserve, protect, and enhance the Nation’s fish 

and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service is the 

primary federal agency responsible for migratory birds, endangered plants and animals, certain 

marine mammals, and anadromous fish. This responsibility to conserve our Nation’s fish and wildlife 

resources is shared with other federal agencies and state and tribal governments. 

As part of this responsibility, the Service manages the National Wildlife Refuge System. This system 

is the only nationwide system of federal land managed and protected for wildlife and their habitats. 

The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System is 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. 

The Vieques National Wildlife Refuge is managed as part of the Refuge System in accordance with 

the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, the Refuge Recreation Act of 1962, Executive Order 

12996 (Management and General Public Use of the National Wildlife Refuge System), and other 

relevant legislation, executive orders, regulations, and policies. 

KEY LEGISLATION/POLICIES FOR PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 

Antiquities Act (1906): Authorizes the scientific investigation of antiquities on federal land and 

provides penalties for unauthorized removal of objects taken or collected without a permit. 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918): Designates the protection of migratory birds as a federal 

responsibility. This Act enables the setting of seasons, and other regulations including the closing of 

areas, federal or non-federal, to the hunting of migratory birds. 

Migratory Bird Conservation Act (1929): Establishes procedures for acquisition by purchase, 

rental, or gift of areas approved by the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission. 

Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act (1934): Authorized the opening of part of a 

refuge to waterfowl hunting. 

Fish and Wildlife Act (1956): Established a comprehensive national fish and wildlife policy and 

broadened the authority for acquisition and development of refuges. 

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (1958): Allows the Fish and Wildlife Service to enter into 

agreements with private landowners for wildlife management purposes. 
192 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Refuge Recreation Act (1962): Allows the use of refuges for recreation when such uses are compatible 

with the refuge’s primary purposes and when sufficient funds are available to manage the uses. 

Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (1965): Uses the receipts from the sale of surplus 

federal land, outer continental shelf oil and gas sales, and other sources for land acquisition 

under several authorities. 

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 as amended by the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, 16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee. (Refuge 

Administration Act): Defines the National Wildlife Refuge System and authorizes the Secretary of the 

Interior to permit any use of a refuge provided such use is compatible with the major purposes for which 

the refuge was established. The Refuge Improvement Act clearly defines a unifying mission for the 

refuge system; establishes the legitimacy and appropriateness of the six priority public uses (hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography and environmental education and interpretation); 

establishes a formal process for determining compatibility; established the responsibilities of the 

Secretary of the Interior for managing and protecting the System; and requires a comprehensive 

conservation plan for each refuge by the year 2012. The Refuge Improvement Act amended portions of 

the Refuge Recreation Act and National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966. 

Architectural Barriers Act (1968): Requires federally owned, leased, or funded buildings and 

facilities to be accessible to persons with disabilities. 

National Environmental Policy Act (1969): Requires the disclosure of the environmental impacts of 

any major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. 

Rehabilitation Act (1973): Requires that programmatic and physical accessibility be made available in 

any facility funded by the Federal Government, ensuring that anyone can participate in any program. 

Clean Air Act (1990): Directed the Environmental Protection Agency to set limits on how much of a 

pollutant can be in the air anywhere in the United States. The law allows individual states to have 

stronger pollution controls, but states are not allowed to have weaker pollution controls than those set 

for the whole country. Established standards are included in the following table: 

Clean Water Act (1977): Requires consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for major 

wetland modifications. 

Executive Order 11988 (1977): Each federal agency shall provide leadership and take action to 

reduce the risk of flood loss and minimize the impact of floods on human safety, and preserve the 

natural and beneficial values served by the flood plain. 

Emergency Wetlands Resources Act (1986): The purpose of the Act is “To promote the 

conservation of migratory waterfowl and to offset or prevent the serious loss of wetlands by the 

acquisition of wetlands and other essential habitat, and for other purposes.” 

Federal Noxious Weed Act (1990): Requires the use of integrated management systems to control 

or contain undesirable plant species; and an interdisciplinary approach with the cooperation of other 

federal and state agencies. 

Americans with Disabilities Act (1992): Prohibits discrimination in public accommodations and 

services. 
Section B. Appendices 193

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Pollutant Primary Stds. Averaging Times Secondary Stds. 

Carbon Monoxide 9 ppm (10 mg/m3

) 8-hour1 None 

35 ppm 

(40 mg/m3

) 

1-hour1

 None 

Lead 1.5 μg/m3

 Quarterly Average Same as Primary 

Nitrogen Dioxide 0.053 ppm 

(100 μg/m3

) 

Annual (Arithmetic Mean) Same as Primary 

Particulate Matter (PM10) 50 μg/m3

 Annual2 (Arith. Mean) Same as Primary 

150 ug/m3 24-hour1 

Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 15.0 μg/m3

 Annual3 (Arith. Mean) Same as Primary 

65 ug/m3 24-hour4 

Ozone 0.08 ppm 8-hour5

 Same as Primary 

0.12 ppm 1-hour6 Same as Primary 

Sulfur Oxides 0.03 ppm Annual (Arith. Mean) ------- 

0.14 ppm 24-hour1 ------- 

------- 3-hour1 0.5 ppm 

(1300 ug/m3

) 

1

 Not to be exceeded more than once per year. 

2

 To attain this standard, the expected annual arithmetic mean PM10 concentration at each monitor within an area must not 

exceed 50 ug/m3

. 3

 To attain this standard, the 3-year average of the annual arithmetic mean PM2.5 concentrations from single or multiple 

community-oriented monitors must not exceed 15.0 ug/m3

. 4

 To attain this standard, the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations at each population-oriented 

monitor within an area must not exceed 65 ug/m3

. 5

 To attain this standard, the 3-year average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations 

measured at each monitor within an area over each year must not exceed 0.08 ppm. 6

 (a) The standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with maximum hourly average 

concentrations above 0.12 ppm is <= 1, as determined by appendix H. 

 (b) The 1-hour NAAQS will no longer apply to an area one year after the effective date of the designation of that area for 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The effective designation date for most areas is June 15, 2004. (40 CFR 50.9; see Federal 

Register of April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23996).)
194 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Executive Order 12996 Management and General Public Use of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System (1996): Defines the mission, purpose, and priority public uses of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System. It also presents four principles to guide management of the system. 

Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites (1996): Directs federal land management agencies to 

accommodate access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites by Indian religious practitioners, 

avoid adversely affecting the physical integrity of such sacred sites, and where appropriate, maintain 

the confidentiality of sacred sites. 

Emergency Wetland Resources Act of 1986: This Act authorized the purchase of wetlands from 

Land and Water Conservation Fund moneys, removing a prior prohibition on such acquisitions. The 

Act also requires the Secretary of the Interior to establish a National Wetlands Priority Conservation 

Plan, requires the states to include wetlands in their comprehensive outdoor recreation plans, and 

transfers to the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund an amount equal to import duties on arms and 

ammunition. 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat. 884), as amended: Public Law 

93-205, approved December 28, 1973, repealed the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 

December 5, 1969 (P.L. 91-135, 83 Stat. 275). The 1969 act amended the Endangered Species 

Preservation Act of October 15, 1966 (P.L. 89-669, 80 Stat. 926). The 1973 Endangered Species Act 

provided for the conservation of ecosystems upon which threatened and endangered species of fish, 

wildlife, and plants depend, both through federal action and by encouraging the establishment of 

state programs. The Act authorizes the determination and listing of species as threatened and 

endangered; prohibits unauthorized taking, possession, sale, and transport of endangered species; 

provides authority to acquire land for the conservation of listed species, using land and water 

conservation funds; authorizes establishment of cooperative agreements and grants-in-aid to states 

that establish and maintain active and adequate programs for threatened and endangered wildlife 

and plants; authorizes the assessment of civil and criminal penalties for violating the Act or 

regulations; and authorizes the payment of rewards to anyone furnishing information leading to arrest 

and conviction of anyone violating the Act and any regulation issued thereunder. 

 

Environmental Education Act of 1990(20 USC 5501-5510; 104 Stat. 3325): Public Law 101-619, 

signed November 16, 1990, established the Office of Environmental Education within the 

Environmental Protection Agency to develop and administer a federal environmental education 

program. Responsibilities of the Office include developing and supporting programs to improve 

understanding of the natural and developed environment, and the relationships between humans and 

their environment; supporting the dissemination of educational materials; developing and supporting 

training programs and environmental education seminars; managing a federal grant program; and 

administering an environmental internship and fellowship program. The Office is required to develop 

and support environmental programs in consultation with other federal natural resource management 

agencies, including the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Executive Order 11988, Flood Plain Management: The purpose of this executive order, signed 

May 24, 1977, is to prevent federal agencies from contributing to the “adverse impacts associated 

with occupancy and modification of floodplains” and the “direct or indirect support of flood plain 

development.” In the course of fulfilling their respective authorities, federal agencies “shall take 

action to reduce the risk of flood loss, to minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health and 

welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by flood plains.” 

Fish and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978: This Act was passed to improve the administration of 

fish and wildlife programs and amends several earlier laws, including the Refuge Recreation Act, the 
Section B. Appendices 195

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, and the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956. It 

authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to accept gifts and bequests of real and personal property on 

behalf of the United States. It also authorizes the use of volunteers on Service projects and 

appropriations to carry out volunteer programs. 

Historic Preservation Acts include: 

Antiquities Act (16 USC 431 - 433)--The Act of June 8, 1906, (34 Stat. 225): This Act authorizes 

the President of the United States to designate as National Monuments objects or areas of historic or 

scientific interests on lands owned or controlled by the United States. The Act required that a permit 

be obtained for examination of ruins, excavation of archaeological sites and the gathering of objects 

of antiquity on lands under the jurisdiction of the Secretaries of Interior, Agriculture, and Army, and 

provided penalties for violations. 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470aa - 47011): Public Law 96-95, approved 

October 31, 1979, (93 Stat. 721): This Act largely supplanted the resource protection provisions of 

the Antiquities Act for archaeological items. It established detailed requirements for issuance of 

permits for any excavation for, or removal of, archaeological resources from federal and Indian lands. 

It also established civil and criminal penalties for the unauthorized excavation, removal, or damage of 

any such resources; for any trafficking in such resources removed from federal and Indian lands in 

violation of any provision of federal law; and for interstate and foreign commerce in such resources 

acquired, transported, or received in violation of any state or local law. 

Public Law 100-588, approved November 3, 1988, (102 Stat. 2983) lowered the threshold value of 

artifacts triggering the felony provisions of the Act from $5,000 to $500, made attempting to commit 

an action prohibited by the Act a violation, and required the land managing agencies to establish 

public awareness programs regarding the value of archaeological resources to the nation. 

Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 469-469c): Public Law 86-523, 

approved June 27, 1960, (74 Stat. 220), and amended by Public Law 93-291, approved May 24, 

1974, (88 Stat. 174): This Act directed federal agencies to notify the Secretary of the Interior 

whenever a federal, federally assisted, or licensed or permitted project may cause loss or destruction 

of significant scientific, prehistoric or archaeological data. The Act authorized use of appropriated, 

donated, and/or transferred funds for the recovery, protection, and preservation of such data. 

Historic Sites, Buildings and Antiquities Act (16 U.S.C. 461-462, 464-467): The Act of August 

21,1935, (49 Stat. 666) popularly known as the Historic Sites Act, as amended by Public Law 89-249, 

approved October 9,1965, (79 Stat. 971): This Act declared it a national policy to preserve historic 

sites and objects of national significance, including those located on refuges. It provided procedures 

for designation, acquisition, administration, and protection of such sites. Among other things, 

National Historic and Natural Landmarks are designated under authority of this Act. As of January 

1989, thirty-one national wildlife refuges contained such sites. 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470-470b, 470c-470n): Public Law 89-665, 

approved October 15, 1966, (80 Stat. 915) and repeatedly amended: This Act provided for 

preservation of significant historical features (e.g., buildings, objects, and sites) through a grant-in-aid 

program to the states. It established a National Register of Historic Places and a program of matching 

grants under the existing National Trust for Historic Preservation (16 U.S.C. 468-468d). The Act 

established an Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, which was made a permanent independent 

agency in Public Law 94-422, approved September 28, 1976 (90 Stat. 1319). That Act also created the 

Historic Preservation Fund. Federal agencies are directed to take into account the effects of their 
196 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

actions on items or sites listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. As of 

January 1989, ninety-one such sites on national wildlife refuges are listed in this Register. 

Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1948: This Act provides funding through receipts from 

the sale of surplus federal land, appropriations from oil and gas receipts from the outer continental 

shelf, and other sources of land acquisition under several authorities. Appropriations from the fund 

may be used for matching grants to states for outdoor recreation projects and for land acquisition by 

various federal agencies, including the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act (16 U.S.C. 718-718j, 48 Stat. 452), as 

amended: The “Duck Stamp Act,” of March 16, 1934, requires each waterfowl hunter, 16 years of 

age or older, to possess a valid federal hunting stamp. Receipts from the sale of the stamp are 

deposited in a special Treasury account known as the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund and are not 

subject to appropriations. 

National and Community Service Act of 1960 (42 U.S.C. 12401:104 Stat. 3127), Public Law 101-

610, signed November 16,1990: This Act authorizes several programs to engage citizens of the 

United States in full- and/or part-time projects designed to combat illiteracy and poverty, provide job 

skills, enhance educational skills, and fulfill environmental needs. Several provisions are of particular 

interest to the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

American Conservation and Youth Service Corps: A federal grant program established under 

Subtitle C of the law, the Corps offers an opportunity for young adults between the ages of 16-25, or 

in the case of summer programs, 15-21, to engage in approved human and natural resources 

projects which benefit the public or are carried out on federal or Indian lands. To be eligible for 

assistance, natural resource programs must focus on improvement of wildlife habitat and recreational 

areas, fish culture, fishery assistance, erosion, wetlands protection, pollution control and similar 

projects. A stipend of not more than 100 percent of the poverty level will be paid to participants. A 

Commission established to administer the Youth Service Corps will make grants to States, the 

Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior, and the Director of ACTION to carry out these responsibilities. 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1959 (P.L. 91-190,42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, January 1, 1970, 

83 Stat. 852) as amended by Public Law 94-52, July 3, 1975, 89 Stat. 258, and Public Law 94-83, 

August 9, 1975, 89 Stat. 424): Title I of the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act requires that all 

federal agencies prepare detailed environmental impact statements for “every recommendation or report 

on proposals for legislation and other major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human 

environment.” The 1969 statute stipulated the factors to be considered in environmental impact 

statements, and required that federal agencies employ an interdisciplinary approach in related decisionmaking and develop means to ensure that unquantified environmental values are given appropriate 

consideration, along with economic and technical considerations. Title II of this statute requires annual 

reports on environmental quality from the President to the Congress, and established a Council on 

Environmental Quality in the Executive Office of the President with specific duties and functions. 

National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997: Public Law 105-57, amended the 

National Wildlife Refuge System Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-ee), and provided guidance for 

management and public use of the refuge system. The Act mandates that the refuge system be 

consistently directed and managed as a national system of lands and waters devoted to wildlife 

conservation and management. The Act establishes priorities for recreational uses of the refuge 

system. Six wildlife-dependent uses are specifically named in the Act: hunting, fishing, wildlife 

observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation. These activities 

are to be promoted within the Refuge System and subject to compatibility determinations. A 
Section B. Appendices 197

compatible use is one that, in the sound professional judgment of the refuge manager, will not 

materially interfere with, or detract from, fulfillment of the National Wildlife Refuge System Mission or 

refuge purpose(s). As stated in the Act, “The mission of the system is 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.” The Act also requires the development of a 

comprehensive conservation plan for each refuge and that management be consistent with the plan. 

When writing a plan for expanded or new refuges, and when making management decisions, the Act 

requires effective coordination with other federal agencies, state fish and wildlife or conservation 

agencies, and refuge neighbors. A refuge must also provide opportunities for public involvement 

when making a compatibility determination. 

North American Wetlands Conservation Act (103 Stat. 1968; 16 U.S.C. 44O1~4412) Public Law 

101-233, enacted December 13, 1989: This act provides funding and administrative direction for 

implementation of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the Tripartite Agreement on 

Wetlands between Canada, the United States, and Mexico. The Act converts the Pittman-Robertson 

account into a trust fund, with the interest available without appropriation through the year 2006, to 

carry out the programs authorized by the Act, along with an authorization for annual appropriation of 

$15 million plus an amount equal to the fines and forfeitures collected under the Migratory Bird Treaty 

Act. Available funds may be expended, upon approval of the Migratory Bird Conservation 

Commission, for payment of not to exceed 50 percent of the United States’ share of the cost of 

wetlands conservation projects in Canada, Mexico, or the United States (or 100 percent of the cost of 

projects on federal lands). At least 50 percent and no more than 70 percent of the funds received are 

to go to Canada and Mexico each year. 

Refuge Recreation Act of 1952: This Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to administer 

refuges, hatcheries, and other conservation areas for recreational use, when such uses do not 

interfere with the area’s primary purposes. It authorizes construction and maintenance of recreational 

facilities and the acquisition of land for incidental fish and wildlife oriented recreational development 

or protection of natural resources. It also authorizes the charging of fees for public uses. 

Refuge Revenue Sharing Act (16 U.S.C. 715s): Section 401 of the Act of June 15, 1935, (49 Stat. 

383) provided for payments to counties in lieu of taxes, using revenues derived from the sale of 

products from refuges. Public Law 88-523, approved August 30, 1964, (78 Stat. 701) made major 

revisions by requiring that all revenues received from refuge products, such as animals, timber and 

minerals, or from leases or other privileges, be deposited in a special Treasury account and net receipts 

distributed to counties for public schools and roads. Public Law 93-509, approved December 3, 1974, 

(88 Stat. 1603) required that moneys remaining in the fund after payments be transferred to the 

Migratory Bird Conservation Fund for land acquisition under provisions of the Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act. Public Law 95-469, approved October 17, 1978, (92 Stat. 1319) expanded the 

revenue sharing system to include National Fish Hatcheries and Service research stations. It also 

included in the Refuge Revenue Sharing Fund receipts from the sale of salmonid carcasses. Payments 

to counties were established as follows: on acquired land, the greatest amount calculated on the basis 

of 75 cents per acre, three-fourths of one percent of the appraised value, or 25 percent of the net 

receipts produced from the land; and on land withdrawn from the public domain, 25 percent of net 

receipts and basic payments under Public Law 94-565 (31 U.S.C. 1601-1607, 90 Stat. 2662). This 

amendment also authorized appropriations to make up any difference between the amount in the fund 

and the amount scheduled for payment in any year. The stipulation that payments be used for schools 

and roads was removed, but counties were required to pass payments along to other units of local 

government within the county that suffer losses in revenues due to the establishment of Service areas. 
198 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Wilderness Act of 1954: Public Law 88-577, approved September 3,1964, directed the Secretary 

of the Interior, within 10 years, to review every roadless area of 5,000 or more acres and every 

roadless island (regardless of size) within National Wildlife Refuge and National Park Systems for 

inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. 

LEGISLATION SPECIFIC TO VIEQUES NWR 

Public Law 106-398 

TITLE XV--NAVY ACTIVITIES ON THE ISLAND OF VIEQUES, PUERTO RICO 

Sec.1501.Assistance for economic growth on Vieques. 

Sec.1502.Conveyance of Naval Ammunition Support Detachment, Vieques 

 Island. 

Sec.1503.Determination regarding continuation of Navy training. 

Sec.1504.Actions if training is approved. 

Sec.1505.Requirements if training is not approved or mandate for 

 referendum is vitiated. 

Sec.1506.Certain properties exempt from conveyance or transfer. 

Sec.1507.Moratorium on improvements at Fort Buchanan. 

Sec.1508.Transfer and management of Conservation Zones. 

SEC. 1501. ASSISTANCE FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH ON VIEQUES. 

 (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of 

Defense for fiscal year 2000, $40,000,000 to be used to provide economic assistance for the 

people and communities of the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico, in accordance with the terms 

and conditions of the Vieques supplemental appropriation. 

[[Page 114 STAT. 1654A-349]] 

 (b) Transfer Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may transfer amounts of authorizations made 

available to the Department of Defense in subsection (a) to any agency or office of the United 

States Government in order to implement the projects for which the Vieques supplemental 

appropriation is made available. The transfer authority under this section is in addition to any 

transfer authority provided in Public Law 106-65 or any other Act. 

 (c) Notice to Congress.--The advance notice required by the Vieques supplemental appropriation 

of each proposed transfer shall also be submitted to the Committee on Armed Services of the 

Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives. 

 (d) Definition.--In this section, the term ``Vieques supplemental appropriation'' means the 

paragraph under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' in chapter 1 of title I 

of the Emergency Supplemental Act, 2000 (division B of Public Law 106-246; 114 Stat. 525). 

SEC. 1502. CONVEYANCE OF NAVAL AMMUNITION SUPPORT DETACHMENT, VIEQUES 

 ISLAND. 

 (a) Conveyance Required.-- 

 (1) Property to be conveyed.--The Secretary of the Navy 

 shall convey, without consideration, to the Municipality of 

 Vieques, Puerto Rico, all right, title, and interest of the 

 United States in and to the land constituting the Naval 
Section B. Appendices 199

 Ammunition Support Detachment located on the western end of the 

 island of Vieques, Puerto Rico, except for-- 

 (A) the property that is exempt from conveyance 

 under section 1506; 

 (B) the property that is required to be transferred 

 to the Secretary of the Interior under section 1508(a); and 

 (C) any property that is conveyed pursuant to 

 section 1508(b). 

 (2) Time for conveyance.--The Secretary of the Navy shall 

 complete the conveyance required by paragraph (1) not later than 

 May 1, 2001. 

 (b) Description of Property.--The Secretary of the Navy, in 

consultation with the Secretary of the Interior on issues relating to 

natural resource protection under section 1508, shall determine the 

exact acreage and legal description of the property required to be 

conveyed pursuant to subsection (a), including the legal description of 

any easements, rights of way, and other interests that are retained 

pursuant to section 1506. 

 (c) Environmental Restoration.-- 

 (1) Objective of conveyance.--An important objective of the 

 conveyance required by this section is to promote timely 

 redevelopment of the conveyed property in a manner that enhances 

 employment opportunities and economic redevelopment, consistent 

 with all applicable environmental requirements and in full 

 consultation with the Governor of Puerto Rico, for the benefit 

 of the residents of the island of Vieques. 

 (2) Conveyance despite response need.--If the Secretary of 

 the Navy, by May 1, 2001, is unable to provide the covenant 

 required by subparagraph (A)(ii)(I) of section 120(h)(3) of the 

 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

 Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)(3)) with respect to the 

 property to be conveyed, the Secretary shall still complete 

[[Page 114 STAT. 1654A-350]] 

 the conveyance by that date, as required by subsection (a)(2). 

 The Secretary shall remain responsible for completing all 

 response actions required under such Act. Upon completion of 

 such response actions, the Secretary shall execute and deliver 

 to the transferee the warranty referred to in subparagraph 

 (C)(iii) of such section. The completion of the response actions 

 shall not be delayed on account of the conveyance. 

 (3) Continued navy responsibility.--Consistent with existing 

 Navy and legal requirements, the Secretary of the Navy shall 

 remain responsible for the environmental condition of the 

 property, and neither the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico nor the 

 Municipality of Vieques shall be responsible for such condition 

 existing at the time of the conveyance. 
200 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

 (4) Savings clause.--All response actions with respect to 

 the property to be conveyed shall take place in compliance with 

 current law. 

 (d) Control of Conveyed Property.--The government of the 

Municipality of Vieques, acting through the elected officials of that 

government, shall have the power to administer, manage, and control the 

property conveyed under subsection (a) in any manner determined by the 

government of the Municipality of Vieques as being most advantageous to 

the majority of the residents of the island of Vieques (consistent with 

the laws of the United States). 

 (e) Indemnification.-- 

 (1) Entities and persons covered; extent.--(A) Except as 

 provided in subparagraph (C), and subject to paragraph (2), the 

 Secretary of Defense shall hold harmless, defend, and indemnify 

 in full the persons and entities described in subparagraph (B) 

 from and against any suit, claim, demand or action, liability, 

 judgment, cost or other fee arising out of any claim for 

 personal injury or property damage (including death, illness, or 

 loss of or damage to property or economic loss) that results 

 from, or is in any manner predicated upon, the release or 

 threatened release (after the conveyance is made under 

 subsection (a)) of any hazardous substance or pollutant or 

 contaminant as a result of Department of Defense activities at 

 those parts of the Naval Ammunition Support Detachment conveyed 

 pursuant to subsection (a). 

 (B) The persons and entities described in this paragraph are the following: 

 (i) The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (including any 

 officer, agent, or employee of the Commonwealth of 

 Puerto Rico). 

 (ii) The Municipality of Vieques, Puerto Rico, and 

 any other political subdivision of the Commonwealth of 

 Puerto Rico that acquires such ownership or control 

 (including any officer, agent, or employee of that 

 Municipality or other political subdivision). 

 (iii) Any other person or entity that acquires such 

 ownership or control. 

 (iv) Any successor, assignee, transferee, lender, or 

 lessee of a person or entity described in clauses (i) 

 through (iii). 

 (C) To the extent the persons and entities described in 

 subparagraph (B) contributed to any such release or threatened 

 release, subparagraph (A) shall not apply. 

[[Page 114 STAT. 1654A-351]] 

 (2) Conditions on indemnification.--No indemnification may 

 be afforded under this subsection unless the person or entity 

 making a claim for indemnification-- 

 (A) notifies the Secretary of Defense in writing 

 within two years after such claim accrues or begins 
Section B. Appendices 201

 action within six months after the date of mailing, by 

 certified or registered mail, of notice of final denial 

 of the claim by the Secretary of Defense; 

 (B) furnishes to the Secretary of Defense copies of 

 pertinent papers the entity receives; 

 (C) furnishes evidence of proof of any claim, loss, 

 or damage covered by this subsection; and 

 (D) provides, upon request by the Secretary of 

 Defense, access to the records and personnel of the 

 entity for purposes of defending or settling the claim or action. 

 (3) Responsibilities of secretary of defense.--(A) In any 

 case in which the Secretary of Defense determines that the 

 Department of Defense may be required to make indemnification 

 payments to a person under this subsection for any suit, claim, 

 demand or action, liability, judgment, cost or other fee arising 

 out of any claim for personal injury or property damage referred 

 to in paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary may settle or defend, on 

 behalf of that person, the claim for personal injury or property damage. 

 (B) In any case described in subparagraph (A), if the person 

 to whom the Department of Defense may be required to make 

 indemnification payments does not allow the Secretary of Defense 

 to settle or defend the claim, the person may not be afforded 

 indemnification with respect to that claim under this subsection. 

 (4) Accrual of action.--For purposes of paragraph (2)(A), 

 the date on which a claim accrues is the date on which the 

 plaintiff knew (or reasonably should have known) that the 

 personal injury or property damage referred to in paragraph (1) 

 was caused or contributed to by the release or threatened 

 release of a hazardous substance or pollutant or contaminant as 

 a result of Department of Defense activities at any part of the 

 Naval Ammunition Support Detachment conveyed pursuant to 

 subsection (a). 

 (5) Relationship to other laws.--Nothing in this subsection 

 shall be construed as affecting or modifying in any way 

 subsection 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

 Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)). 

 (6) Definitions.--In this subsection, the terms ``hazardous 

 substance'', ``release'', and ``pollutant or contaminant'' have 

 the meanings given such terms under paragraphs (9), (14), (22), 

 and (33) of section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental 

 Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601). 

SEC. 1503. DETERMINATION REGARDING CONTINUATION OF NAVY TRAINING. 

 (a) Referendum.-- 

 (1) Requirement.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 

 President shall provide for a referendum to be conducted on the 

 island of Vieques, Puerto Rico, to determine by a majority 
202 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

[[Page 114 STAT. 1654A-352]] 

 of the votes cast in the referendum by the Vieques electorate 

 whether the people of Vieques approve or disapprove of the 

 continuation of the conduct of live-fire training, and any other 

 types of training, by the Armed Forces at the Navy's training 

 sites on the island under the conditions described in subsection (d). 

 (2) Exception.--If the Chief of Naval Operations and the 

 Commandant of the Marine Corps jointly submit to the 

 congressional defense committees, after the date of the 

 enactment of this Act and before the date set forth in 

 subsection (c), their certification that the Vieques Naval 

 Training Range is no longer needed for training by the Navy and 

 the Marine Corps, then the requirement for a referendum under 

 paragraph (1) shall cease to be effective on the date on which 

 the certification is submitted. 

 (b) Prohibition of Other Propositions.--In the referendum under this 

section, no proposition or option may be presented as an alternative to 

the propositions of approval and of disapproval of the continuation of 

the conduct of training as described in subsection (a)(1). 

 (c) Time for Referendum.--The referendum required under this section 

shall be held on May 1, 2001, or within 270 days before such date or 270 

days after such date. The Secretary of the Navy shall publicize the date 

set for the referendum 90 days before that date. 

 (d) Required Training Conditions.--For the purposes of the 

referendum under this section, the conditions for the continuation of 

the conduct of training are those that are proposed by the Secretary of 

the Navy and publicized on the island of Vieques in connection with, and 

for a reasonable period in advance of, the referendum. The conditions 

shall include the following: 

 (1) Live-fire training.--A condition that the training may include live-fire training. 

 (2) Maximum annual days of use.--A condition that the 

 training may be conducted on not more than 90 days each year. 

 (e) Proclamation of Outcome.--Promptly after the referendum is 

completed under this section, the President shall determine, and issue a 

proclamation declaring, the outcome of the referendum. The President's 

determination shall be final, and the outcome of the referendum (as so 

determined) shall be binding. 

 (f ) Vieques Electorate Defined.-- 

 (1) Registered voters.--In this section, the term ``Vieques 

 electorate'', with respect to a referendum under this section, 

 means the residents of the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico, who, 

 on both dates specified in paragraph (2), are registered to vote 

 in a general election held for casting ballots for the election 

 of the Resident Commissioner of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 

 (2) Registration dates.--The dates referred to in paragraph 

 (1) are as follows: 

 (A) November 7, 2000. 

 (B) The date that is 180 days before the date of the 

 referendum under this section. 
Section B. Appendices 203

[[Page 114 STAT. 1654A-353]] 

SEC. 1504. ACTIONS IF TRAINING IS APPROVED. 

 (a) Condition for Effectiveness.--This section shall take effect on 

the date on which the President issues a proclamation under subsection 

(e) of section 1503 declaring that the continuation of the conduct of 

training (including live-fire training) by the Armed Forces at the 

Navy's training sites on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico, under the 

conditions described in subsection (d) of such section, has been 

approved in the referendum conducted under such section. 

 (b) Authorization of Appropriations for Additional Economic 

Assistance.--There is authorized to be appropriated to the President 

$50,000,000 to provide economic assistance for the people and 

communities of the island of Vieques. This authorization of 

appropriations is in addition to the amount authorized to appropriated 

to provide economic assistance under section 1501. 

 (c) Training Range To Remain Open.--The Vieques Naval Training Range 

shall remain available for the use of the Armed Forces, including for 

live-fire training. 

SEC. 1505. REQUIREMENTS IF TRAINING IS NOT APPROVED OR MANDATE FOR 

 REFERENDUM IS VITIATED. 

 (a) Conditions for Effectiveness.--This section shall take effect on 

the date on which either of the following occurs: 

 (1) The President issues a proclamation under subsection (e) 

 of section 1503 declaring that the continuation of the conduct 

 of training (including live-fire training) by the Armed Forces 

 at the Navy's training sites on the island of Vieques, Puerto 

 Rico, under the conditions described in subsection (d) of such 

 section, has not been approved in the referendum conducted under 

 such section. 

 (2) The requirement for a referendum under section 1503 

 ceases to be effective pursuant to subsection (a)(2) of such section. 

 (b) Actions Required of Secretary of Defense.-- 

 (1) Termination of operation.--Not later than May 1, 2003, 

 the Secretary of Defense shall-- 

 (A) terminate all Navy and Marine Corps training 

 operations on the island of Vieques; and 

 (B) terminate all Navy and Marine Corps operations 

 at Naval Station Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, that are 

 related exclusively to the use of the training range on 

 the island of Vieques by the Navy and the Marine Corps. 

 (2) Relocation of units.--The Secretary of Defense may 

 relocate the units of the Armed Forces (other than those of the 

 reserve components) and activities of the Department of Defense 

 (including nonappropriated fund activities) at Fort Buchanan, 

 Puerto Rico, to Naval Station Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, to 

 ensure maximum utilization of capacity. 

 (3) Closure of installations and facilities.--The Secretary 
204 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

 of Defense shall close the Department of Defense installations 

 and facilities on the island of Vieques, other than properties 

 exempt from conveyance and transfer under section 1506. 

 (c) Actions Required of Secretary of the Navy.--The Secretary of the 

Navy shall transfer, without reimbursement, to the administrative 

jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior-- 

 (1) the Live Impact Area on the island of Vieques; 

[[Page 114 STAT. 1654A-354]] 

 (2) all Department of Defense real properties on the eastern 

 side of the island that are identified as conservation zones; 

 and 

 (3) all other Department of Defense real properties on the 

 eastern side of the island. 

 (d) Actions Required of Secretary of the Interior.-- 

 (1) Retention and administration.--The Secretary of the 

 Interior shall retain, and may not dispose of any of, the 

 properties transferred under paragraphs (2) and (3) of 

 subsection (c) and shall administer such properties as wildlife 

 refuges under the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

 Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.) pending the enactment of a 

 law that addresses the disposition of such properties. 

 (2) Responsibility for Live Impact Area.--Upon a termination 

 of Navy and Marine Corps training operations on the island of 

 Vieques under subsection (b)(1), the Secretary of the Interior 

 shall assume responsibility for the administration of the Live 

 Impact Area, administer that area as a wilderness area under the 

 Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), and deny public access 

 to the area. 

 (3) Live Impact Area Defined.--In this section, the term 

 ``Live Impact Area'' means the parcel of real property, 

 consisting of approximately 900 acres (more or less), on the 

 island of Vieques that is designated by the Secretary of the 

 Navy for targeting by live ordnance in the training of forces of 

 the Navy and Marine Corps. 

 (e) GAO Review.-- 

 (1) Requirement for review.--The Comptroller General shall 

 review the requirement for the continued use of Fort Buchanan, 

 Puerto Rico, by active Army forces and shall submit to the 

 congressional defense committees a report containing-- 

 (A) the findings resulting from the review; and 

 (B) recommendations regarding the closure of Fort 

 Buchanan and the consolidation of units of the Armed 

 Forces to Naval Station Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico. 

 (2) Time for submittal of report.--The Comptroller General 

 shall submit the report under paragraph (1) not later than one 

 year after the date on which the referendum under section 1503 

 is conducted or one year after the date on which a certification 
Section B. Appendices 205

 is submitted to the congressional defense committees under 

 subsection (a)(2) of such section, as the case may be. 

SEC. 1506. CERTAIN PROPERTIES EXEMPT FROM CONVEYANCE OR TRANSFER. 

 (a) Exempt Property.--The Department of Defense properties and 

property interests described in subsection (b) may not be conveyed or 

transferred out of the Department of Defense under this title. 

 (b) Properties Described.--The exemption under subsection (a) 

applies to the following Department of Defense properties and property 

interests on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico: 

 (1) ROTHR site.--The site for relocatable over-the-horizon 

 radar. 

 (2) Telecommunications sites.--The Mount Pirata 

 telecommunications sites. 

[[Page 114 STAT. 1654A-355]] 

 (3) Associated interests.--Any easements, rights-of-way, and 

 other interests in property that the Secretary of the Navy 

 determines necessary for-- 

 (A) ensuring access to the properties referred to in 

 paragraphs (1) and (2); 

 (B) providing utilities for such properties; 

 (C) ensuring the security of such properties; and 

 (D) ensuring effective maintenance and operations on 

 such properties. 

 (4) Remediation activities.--Any easements, rights-of-way, 

 and other interests in property that the Secretary of the Navy 

 determines necessary for protecting human health and the 

 environment in the discharge of the Secretary's responsibilities 

 for environmental remediation under section 1502(c), until such 

 time as these responsibilities are completed. 

SEC. 1507. MORATORIUM ON IMPROVEMENTS AT FORT BUCHANAN. 

 (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), no 

acquisition, construction, conversion, rehabilitation, extension, or 

improvement of any facility at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico, may be 

initiated or continued on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

 (b) Exceptions.--The prohibition in subsection (a) does not apply to 

the following: 

 (1) Actions necessary to maintain the existing facilities 

 (including utilities) at Fort Buchanan. 

 (2) The construction of reserve component and 

 nonappropriated fund facilities authorized before the date of 

 the enactment of this Act. 
206 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

 (c) Termination.--This section shall cease to be effective upon the 

issuance of a proclamation described in section 1504(a) or the enactment 

of a law, after the date of the enactment of this Act, that authorizes 

any acquisition, construction, conversion, rehabilitation, extension, or 

improvement of any facility at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico. 

SEC. 1508. TRANSFER AND MANAGEMENT OF CONSERVATION ZONES. 

 (a) Transfer to Secretary of the Interior.-- 

 (1) Transfer required.--Except as provided in section 1506, 

 the Secretary of the Navy shall transfer, without reimbursement, 

 to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the 

 Interior all Department of Defense real properties on the 

 western end of the Vieques Island, consisting of a total of 

 approximately 3,100 acres, that are designated as Conservation 

 Zones in section IV of the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding 

 between the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Secretary of the 

 Navy. 

 (2) Time for transfer.--The Secretary of the Navy shall 

 complete the transfer required by paragraph (1) not later than May 1, 2001. 

 (b) Conveyance to Conservation Trust.-- 

 (1) Conveyance required.--Except as provided in section 1506 

 and subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Navy shall 

 convey, without consideration, to the Puerto Rico Conservation 

 Trust the additional Conservation Zones, consisting of a total 

 of approximately 800 acres, identified in Alternative 1 in the 

 Draft Environmental Assessment for the proposed transfer of 

 Naval Ammunition Support Detachment property, 

[[Page 114 STAT. 1654A-356]] 

 Vieques, Puerto Rico, prepared by the Department of the Navy, as 

 described in the Federal Register of August 28, 2000 (65 Fed. Reg. 52100). 

 (2) Time for conveyance.--The Secretary of the Navy shall 

 complete the conveyance required by paragraph (1) not later than 

 May 1, 2001, except that paragraph (1) shall apply only to those 

 portions of the lands described in such paragraph that the 

 Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Secretary of the Interior, and 

 the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust mutually agree, before that date, to-- 

 (A) include in the cooperative agreement under 

 subsection (d)(2); and 

 (B) manage under standards consistent with the 

 standards in subsection (c) applicable to the lands 

 transferred under subsection (a). 

 (c) Administration of Properties as Wildlife Refuges.--The Secretary 

of the Interior shall administer as wildlife refuges under the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et 

seq.) the Conservation Zones transferred to the Secretary under 

subsection (a). 
Section B. Appendices 207

 (d) Cooperative Agreement.-- 

 (1) Required; parties.--The Secretary of the Interior shall 

 manage the Conservation Zones transferred under subsection (a) 

 pursuant to a cooperative agreement among the Commonwealth of 

 Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, and the 

 Secretary of the Interior. 

 (2) Inclusion of adjacent areas.--Areas adjacent to the 

 Conservation Zones transferred under subsection (a) shall be 

 considered for inclusion under the cooperative agreement. 

 Subject to the mutual agreement of the Commonwealth of Puerto 

 Rico, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Puerto Rico 

 Conservation Trust, such adjacent areas may be included under 

 the cooperative agreement, except that the total acreage so 

 included under this paragraph may not exceed 800 acres. This 

 determination of inclusion of lands shall be incorporated into 

 the cooperative agreement process as set forth in paragraph (4). 

 (3) Sea grass area.--The Sea Grass Area west of Mosquito 

 Pier, as identified in the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding 

 between the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Secretary of the 

 Navy, shall be included in the cooperative agreement to be 

 protected under the laws of the United States and the laws of 

 the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 

 (4) Management purposes.--All lands covered by the 

 cooperative agreement shall be managed to protect and preserve 

 the natural resources of the lands in perpetuity. The 

 Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, 

 and the Secretary of the Interior shall follow all applicable 

 Federal environmental laws during the creation and any 

 subsequent amendment of the cooperative agreement, including the 

 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

 seq.), the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

 seq.), and the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). 

 (5) Completion and implementation.--The cooperative 

 agreement shall be completed not later than May 1, 2001. The 

 Secretary of the Interior shall implement the terms and 

[[Page 114 STAT. 1654A-357]] 

 conditions of the cooperative agreement, which can only be 

 amended by agreement of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the 

 Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, and the Secretary of the Interior. 

PUBLIC LAW 107-107 TO AMEND PL 106-398 

SEC. 1049. TERMINATION OF REFERENDUM REQUIREMENT REGARDING 

 CONTINUATION OF MILITARY TRAINING ON 

 ISLAND OF VIEQUES, PUERTO RICO, AND 

 IMPOSITION OF ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS ON 

 CLOSURE OF TRAINING RANGE. 
208 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

 (a) In General.--Title XV of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law by Public 

Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-348) is amended by striking sections 1503, 

1504, and 1505 and inserting the following new sections: 

``SEC. 1503. CONDITIONS ON CLOSURE OF VIEQUES NAVAL TRAINING RANGE. 

 ``(a) Conditional Authority To Close.--The Secretary of the Navy may 

close the Vieques Naval Training Range on the island of Vieques, Puerto 

Rico, and discontinue training at that range only if the Secretary 

certifies to the President and Congress that both of the following 

conditions are satisfied: 

 ``(1) One or more alternative training facilities exist 

 that, individually or collectively, provide an equivalent or 

 superior level of training for units of the Navy and the Marine 

 Corps stationed or deployed in the eastern United States. 

 ``(2) The alternative facility or facilities are available 

 and fully capable of supporting such Navy and Marine Corps 

 training immediately upon cessation of training on Vieques. 

 ``(b) Consultation Required.--In determining whether the conditions 

specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) are satisfied, the 

Secretary of the Navy shall take into account the written views and 

recommendations of the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of 

the Marine Corps. The Secretary shall submit these written views and 

recommendations to Congress with the certification submitted under subsection (a). 

``SEC. 1504. CLOSURE OF VIEQUES NAVAL TRAINING RANGE AND DISPOSAL 

 OF CLOSED RANGE. 

 ``(a) Termination of Training and Related Closures.--If the 

conditions specified in section 1503(a) are satisfied and the Secretary 

of the Navy makes a determination to close the Vieques Naval Training 

Range and discontinue live-fire training at that range the Secretary of 

the Navy shall-- 

 ``(1) terminate all Navy and Marine Corps training 

 operations on the island of Vieques; 

[[Page 115 STAT. 1231]] 

 ``(2) terminate all Navy and Marine Corps operations at 

 Naval Station Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, that are related 

 exclusively to the use of the training range on the island of 

 Vieques by the Navy and the Marine Corps; and 

 ``(3) close the Navy installations and facilities on the 

 island of Vieques, other than properties exempt from conveyance 

 and transfer under section 1506. 

 ``(b) Transfer to Secretary of the Interior.--Upon termination of 

Navy and Marine Corps training operations on the island of Vieques, the 

Secretary of the Navy shall transfer, without reimbursement, to the 

administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior-- 

 ``(1) the Live Impact Area on the island of Vieques; 
Section B. Appendices 209

 ``(2) all Department of Defense real properties on the 

 eastern side of the island that are identified as conservation 

 zones; and 

 ``(3) all other Department of Defense real properties on the 

 eastern side of the island. 

 ``(c) Administration by Secretary of the Interior.-- 

 ``(1) Retention and administration.--The Secretary of the 

 Interior shall retain, and may not dispose of any of, the 

 properties transferred under paragraphs (2) and (3) of 

 subsection (b) and shall administer such properties as wildlife 

 refuges under the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

 Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.) pending the enactment of a 

 law that addresses the disposition of such properties. 

 ``(2) Live impact area.--The Secretary of the Interior shall 

 assume responsibility for the administration of the Live Impact 

 Area upon transfer under paragraph (1) of subsection (b), 

 administer that area as a wilderness area under the Wilderness 

 Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), and deny public access to the area. 

 ``(d) Live Impact Area Defined.--In this section, the term `Live 

Impact Area' means the parcel of real property, consisting of 

approximately 900 acres (more or less), on the island of Vieques that is 

designated by the Secretary of the Navy for targeting by live ordnance 

in the training of forces of the Navy and Marine Corps.''. 

 (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1507(c) of such Act (114 Stat. 

1654A-355) is amended by striking ``the issuance of a proclamation 

described in section 1504(a) or''. 
210 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

COMMONWEALTH/FWS AGREEMENT FOR WESTERN VIEQUES 
Section B. Appendices 211
212 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 213

COOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT FOR WESTERN VIEQUES LANDS 
214 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 215
216 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 217
218 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

NAVY/DOI MEMORANDA OF AGREEMENT 
Section B. Appendices 219
220 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 221
222 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 223
224 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 225
226 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 227
228 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 229
230 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 231
232 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 233
234 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 235
236 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 237

APPENDIX IV. SERVICE COMMENTS ON 

VIEQUES CULEBRA MASTER 

PLAN FOR SUSTAINABLE 

DEVELOPMENT 

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 

1875 Century Boulevard Atlanta, Georgia 30345 

November 23, 2004 

In Reply Refer To: 

FWSIR4/CRF 

Dr. Juan R. Fernandez 

Comisionado 

Oficina del Comisionado Especial para Vieques y Culebra 

Avenida Fernandez Juncos #635 

San Juan, Puerto Rico 00907 

Dear Dr. Fernandez: 

The Fish and Wildlife Service has reviewed the Master Plan for Sustainable Development of Vieques 

and Culebra and would like to offer the following comments for consideration during the preparation of 

any revised documents. Since there was a very limited time frame for review of these very substantial 

documents, the Service personnel conducting the review focused on the aspects of the Plan that might 

affect national wildlife refuge lands and Service trust resource on Vieques and Culebra. 

General Comments: The background information for the document appears to be a compilation of 

information from numerous sources that do not always provide a consistent format or current 

information. For example, the maps from the U. S. Department of Energy indicating wind resources and 

transmission lines show National Park Service ownership of lands in Culebra and Navy ownership of 

lands in Vieques. While we recognize that the information was extracted from the referenced sources, it 

does not reflect current conditions and in some cases may provide the reader with incorrect perceptions 

of the current status of the lands. In order to provide a clear representation of the current conditions on 

the islands, we recommend that the plan include maps indicating the lands owned and managed by the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Municipalities of Vieques and Culebra 

and the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust. Other specially designated or unique resources that are 

important to the islands should also be indicated. These could include the Marine Reserve at Culebra, 

the Vieques Northwest Seagrass Beds, the bioluminescent bays at Vieques and important resource 

areas such as mangroves and coastal lagoons. 

Zoning: The zoning classifications used on the maps should be defined in the text and a key should 

be provided for easy reference by the readers of the plan. The text notes that there are three new 

zones that were developed for this plan. These are "Distrito Ecoturistico" presumably "ECOT" on the 

maps and "Evaluacion de Recursos" presumably "ER" on the maps. The Vieques maps indicate an 
238 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

area zoned "RD" located to the east of Isabel Segunda. This zoning is indicated as "RP" 

("Reparcealacion y Desarollo") in Attachment 1. The "RD" zoning along with "ECOT" and five 

additional classifications in Attachment 1 are indicated as zoning classifications that have been 

developed and defined by Estudios Tecnicos for the purposes of this plan. The "ER" classification 

and definition; however, is not included in the attachment. In addition, there is no definition given in 

Attachment 1 for the resource protection ("PR") classification that is used for some of the refuge lands 

and lagoons. The lack of a key on the maps or in the adjacent text makes comprehension of the 

proposed zoning in the document difficult and confusing. 

While there are numerous documents referenced and quoted in the Plan, there are other very 

relevant documents that are not included. As a result of the former federal ownership and transfers 

there are some unique legal constraints that have been placed of some of the lands. In Culebra, 

some of the lands were transferred to the Commonwealth with restrictions on the types of uses that 

could occur on them. The quitclaim deed that transferred lands in Culebra noted that the 

Commonwealth was required to obtain approval from the Secretary of the Interior before selling or 

otherwise disposing of the lands and it also restricted some areas for park and recreational uses only. 

When the lands on Western Vieques were transferred from the Navy to the Municipality of Vieques, the 

Puerto Rico Conservation Trust and the Department of the Interior in 2001, the Navy prepared an 

Environmental Assessment and consulted with the Commonwealth regarding the zoning for the lands to 

be transferred. The zoning identified at that time provided for protection of sea turtle nesting beaches 

and known locations of threatened and endangered plants. The zoning classifications in the draft final 

Master Plan for Sustainable Development does not appear to consider these previous commitments for 

protection of these resources. We recommend that the zoning approved in 2001 be referenced and 

included as background for the development of this plan. The resource protection provided by the 2001 

zoning should be maintained even if some of the other uses and classifications are modified. 

The transfer documents and deeds for former federal lands should be provided in the attachments to this 

plan and referenced where appropriate. While the terms of the transfers for these areas do not preclude 

alternative uses and zoning classifications that might be appropriate, there are both legal issues and 

resource values that should be addressed prior to moving forward with any proposals for these areas. 

Wildlife issues: The "Wildlife" sections of the documents provide only cursory references to the 

endangered and threatened species located on and around the islands. The Master Plan is proposing 

development and zoning classifications that could directly and indirectly affect the species and their 

habitats. While a few of the species are noted in the text, there is no discussion of the critical areas and 

habitats that are needed by these species. In order to help provide a basis for some of the zoning 

proposals in the document, we recommend that the documents include a table listing all of the Federal 

and Commonwealth protected species along with their status (Federally threatened or endangered or 

Commonwealth critical) and habitat requirements. Some of the species such as Goetzea elegans 

(endangered) and Stahlia monosperma (threatened), plant species found in Vieques, are located on 

lands that are proposed for ecotourism or agricultural zoning. Others such as the hawksbill sea turtle 

are known to nest on beaches that are adjacent to areas with proposed zoning of CR-1 and PDE (Plan 

de Desarrollo Especial) where certain types of development could occur. Consideration of the unique 

resources and habitats during this planning effort would facilitate an understanding of the concerns and 

restrictions that might apply to future development of these areas. 

On and adjacent to Culebra there are several areas that have been designated as "critical habitat "by 

the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service because of their value 

for endangered and threatened sea turtle species. These areas include the beaches at Resaca, 

Larga, Brava, Culebrita and Cayo Norte and the sea grass beds for a distance of 5.6 km around the 
Section B. Appendices 239

island. In addition, the sea grass beds off the northwest coast of Vieques were designated as a 

Conservation Zone under an agreement between the Commonwealth and the Navy. As part of the 

transfer agreement, these sea grass beds were to continue to be protected and managed by the 

Commonwealth under the terms of a management plan among the Commonwealth, the Puerto Rico 

Conservation Trust and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. That plan was completed in November of 

2002 and should also be included as a reference for the Sustainable Development Master Plan. 

National Wildlife Refuge Issues: The zoning indicated for most of the Culebra National Wildlife 

Refuge is "PR" indicating recognition of the current status as a refuge and the need to protect the 

resource values of that area. It was also noted that some of the offshore cays in Culebra (part of the 

refuge) are classified as CR-1. These cays would more appropriately be designated as PR along with 

the other refuge lands. The national wildlife refuge lands in Vieques; however, have been given a 

variety of classifications including ECOT, RD, CR-1, CR-H, B-2, ER and A-2. 

The Service recognizes the efforts of the Vieques community to have the Navy leave and that there is 

interest in having the lands transferred to the people of Vieques; however, this is subject to a change 

of legislation and cannot be done by the Service. The Service has been mandated to manage the 

lands as a national wildlife refuge and believes that the conservation of the natural resources in this 

area plays a vital role in the ability to design and implement sustainable development alternatives in 

other areas of Vieques. We assume that the classifications given to the refuge lands in Vieques are 

an attempt to plan for the uses of the lands that could occur if the Congress of the United States 

decides to change the legislation that established the refuge and transfer it to the Commonwealth or 

municipality. It should be made very clear in the Master Plan for Sustainable Development for 

Vieques and Culebra, that the Fish and Wildlife Service is legally bound to manage the Vieques 

refuge under the terms of Refuge Administration Act and, with the exception of an area known as 

"parcel C", cannot take any action to transfer lands without specific legislation directing that action. 

Further, without such legislation, the Fish and Wildlife Service will continue to manage the lands for 

the benefit of the public. As a result of this restriction, it would be appropriate to indicate a zoning for 

all refuge lands as PR. If legislation is passed to change the status of the refuge, then it would be 

appropriate to consider other uses and classifications for those lands. 

The zoning proposed for the Vieques refuge lands includes residential (RD) and agricultural (A-2) as 

well as ECOT, CR-1, B-2 and ER designations. The types of development that could normally be 

permitted within these zoning classifications such as; residential development, ecotourism lodges, 

and a variety of agricultural activities, would not normally be appropriate on a national wildlife refuge. 

In addition, the plan has suggested the potential for development of a wind farm on the Eastern 

portions of the refuge. Any proposed uses on the refuge must be compatible with the refuge purposes 

and other authorized and compatible activities. It was noted in the plan that the Refuge Manager 

must approve the uses on the refuge. While it is true that the Refuge Manager conducts the initial 

review to determine if a use is appropriate and compatible, the plan should also reflect that our 

Refuge Managers are bound by legal restrictions, regulations and policy that may preclude approval 

of many types of projects that are not related to the Service mission. 

While there will be wildlife dependent and compatible activities permitted on the refuge and efforts are 

under way to maximize the clean up of contaminated areas to permit their management and use, the 

zoning of the refuge for residential development, tourist facilities(Paradors), agricultural uses and 

wind farms may create unrealistic expectations by the public. 

The Service and cooperating agencies including the Commonwealth are currently in the process of 

developing a Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for the Vieques refuge. This plan will focus on 

the priority public uses for refuges. These are hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife 
240 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

photography, environmental education and environmental interpretation. When determined to be 

compatible with the refuge purposes, these uses are given preference over other activities. In 

conjunction with the development of the CCP, the refuge will be preparing compatibility 

determinations for the priority public uses and any other activities that are proposed. The activities 

that will occur on the refuge will be guided by the CCP. 

 

Summary: The draft Master Plan for Sustainable Development of Vieques and Culebra includes a 

great deal of information and recommendations to aid in the future development of these islands. As 

noted above, we believe that there are several additional documents and issues that deserve further 

consideration in the Plan. We greatly appreciate the opportunity to review and provide comments on 

this document. We are very interested and committed to cooperation with the Commonwealth and 

Municipal agencies in this planning effort and future endeavors. We are looking forward to continuing 

to work with you for the benefit of both the people and the natural resources of Vieques and Culebra. 

Sincerely Yours; 

Signed Sam D. Hamilton 

Regional Director 
Section B. Appendices 241

APPENDIX V. REFUGE RESOURCE 

INFORMATION 

SOILS 

 VIEQUES SOIL SERIES DESCRIPTIONS 

Map 

Symbol Description 

AmB 

AmC2 

Amelia gravelly clay loam consists of deep, well-drained, moderately permeable soils 

with 2 to 5 percent slopes. This soil type has a low available water capacity and fertility, 

and a moderate shrink-swell potential. The chemical and physical properties of this soil 

type along with low rainfall in the area are severe limitations for farming.

Ce Cartagena clay consists of deep, somewhat poorly drained, mildly alkaline, and slowly 

permeable soils with nearly level slopes. This soil has a high available water capacity, 

high shrink-swell potential, and slow runoff. This soil has severe limitations for farming 

because it is somewhat poorly drained, slowly permeable, and difficult to work.

Cf Catano loamy sand consists of deep, excessively drained, rapidly permeable soils with 

nearly level slopes. This soil type has a low available water capacity, low shrink-swell 

potential, and low natural fertility and is not suited to crop cultivation.

CIB Coamo clay loam consists of moderately deep to stratified, well-drained, moderately 

permeable soils with 2 to 5 percent slopes. This soil type has a moderate available 

water capacity, moderate shrink-swell potential, and high natural fertility; however, there 

are severe limitations for farming due to low rainfall in the area. 

Cm Coastal Beaches consists of narrow strips of light-colored beach sand that is saturated 

with seawater and contains many seashells and shell fragments. This land has no value 

for farming and most of it is devoid of vegetation, except for halophytic (salt-tolerant) 

vegetation.

DeE2 

DgF2 

Drf 

Descalabrado clay loam and Descalabrado and Guayama soils consist of shallow, 

well-drained, moderately permeable soils with 20 to 60 percent slopes. This soil type 

has a moderate available water capacity, moderate shrink-swell potential, and medium 

natural fertility. Steep slopes, shallowness to bedrock, rapid runoff, low rainfall, and the 

hazard of erosion are severe limitations for farming in this soil type.

FrB Fraternidad clay consists of deep, moderately well-drained, slowly permeable soils with 

2 to 5 percent slopes. This soil type has a high available water capacity, very high 

shrink-swell potential, and high natural fertility. Slow permeability, poor workability, 

slope, and low rainfall are moderate limitations for farming. These limitations also affect 

land leveling and irrigation.

Md Made Land consists of areas where the soil profile has been covered or destroyed by 

earthmoving operations. These areas generally have been graded for engineering 

purposes and are not suitable for agricultural purposes.
242 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

 VIEQUES SOIL SERIES DESCRIPTIONS 

Map 

Symbol Description 

PdF Pandura-Very Stony Land complex consists of moderately deep, well-drained, 

moderately rapid permeable soils with 40 to 60 percent slopes. This soil type has a low 

available water capacity, medium to rapid runoff, and high susceptibility to erosion. The 

steep, rocky, shallow nature of this soil type causes severe limitations for cultivation of 

crops.

PIB Paso Seco clay consists of deep, moderately well-drained, slowly permeable soils with 

0 to 5 percent slopes. This soil type has a high available water capacity, high shrinkswell potential, and moderate natural fertility. The soil’s high shrink-swell potential and 

poor workability, and the adverse climate in the area are limitations for farming.

Po Poncena clay consists of deep, moderately well-drained, calcareous, slowly permeable 

soils with nearly level slopes. This soil type has a high available water capacity, high 

shrink-swell potential, and moderate natural fertility. The soil’s physical properties along 

with low rainfall for the area and seasonal high water table are severe limitations for 

farming.

PrC2 Pozo Blanco clay loam consists of deep, well-drained, moderately permeable soils with 

5 to 12 percent slopes. This soil type has a moderate available water capacity, 

moderate shrink-swell potential, and medium natural fertility. This soil type has severe 

limitations for farming due to the slope.

Rs Rock Land consists of areas where rock crops out on 50 to 70 percent of the surface. 

Loose stones are common on the surface, and very shallow soil material lies between 

the outcrops and stones. This soil type is in the mountainous part of the area, with 

slopes of 60-70 percent. This soil type has very little value for farming or engineering 

uses, and is restricted mainly to wildlife habitat.

Sm Saltwater Marsh consists of wet, periodically flooded areas that are covered mainly by 

grass, cattails, brush, or other herbaceous plants. This soil type has severe limitations 

for farming because of the salinity of the water. These areas are best suited for wildlife, 

food, and cover.

Tf Tidal Flats consist of areas slightly above sea level that are affected by seawater at high 

tide. This soil type has severe limitations for farming because of the salinity of the water. 

These areas are best suited for wildlife, food, and cover.

Ts Tidal Swamps consist of areas that are covered with a thick growth of mangrove trees 

and are under salty water most of the year. This land type is not extensive and has no 

value for farming, but it serves as a breeding and feeding place for birds, oysters, and 

crabs.

VmE2 Vieques loam consists of moderately deep, well-drained, calcareous, moderately rapid 

permeable soils with 12 to 40 percent slopes. This soil type has a low available water 

capacity and medium natural fertility and is susceptible to erosion. This soil has severe 

limitations for farming because of the steep slope and high erosion rate.
Section B. Appendices 243

FAUNA 

Vieques Nacional Wildlife Refuge Fauna 

Vida Silvestre de Vieques Nacional Wildlife Refuge 

Amphibians and Reptiles / Anfibiosy Reptiles 

Family English Name Spanish Name Genus & Species 

BUFONIDAE Marine toad (I) Sapo común Bufo marinus

LEPTODACTYLIDAE Coqui (U/P) Coquí (U/P) Eleutherodactylus 

coqui

Churri coqui Churrí Eleutherodactylus 

antillensis

Cochran's coqui Coquí pitito Eleutherodactylus 

cochranae

White-lip frog Sapito de labio blanco Leptodactylus 

albilabris

BOIDAE Ball python (I/P) Piton real (I/P) Python reguis 

Boa constrictor (I/P) Boa constrictora (I/P) Boa constrictor 

Virgin Island boa (P) Boa de las Islas 

Virgenes (P) 

Epicrates monensis 

granti 

COLUBRIDAE Puerto Rican racer Alsophis de Puerto 

Rico 

Alsophis portoricensis 

aphantus 

TYPHLOPIDAE Worm snake Culebra ciega Typhlops hypomethes 

Worm snake Culebra ciega Typhlops 

platycephalus 

Worm snake (P) Culebra ciega (P) Typhlops richardi 

VIPERIDAE Fer-de-Lance (P) Fer-de-Lance (P) Bothrops asper 

AMPHISBAENIDAE Legless lizard Culebra de dos 

cabezas 

Amphisbaena caeca 

IGUANIDAE Crested anole Lagartijo común Anolis cristatellus 

Culebra giant anole 

(P) 

Lagarto gigante de 

Culebra (P) 

Anolis roosevelti 

Garden anole Lagartijo jardinero Anolis pulchellus 

Giant anole Lagarto verde Anolis cuvieri 
244 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Family English Name Spanish Name Genus & Species 

Tree anole Lagartijo manchado Anolis stratulus 

Green iguana (I) Iguana verde (I) Iguana iguana 

GEKKONIDAE Common dwarf gecko Salamanquita común Sphaerodactylus 

macrolepis inigoi 

Littoral gecko Salamanquita de 

Roosevelt 

Sphaerodactylus 

roosevelti 

Pigmy gecko Salamanquita pigmea Sphaerodactylus 

Nicholsi townsendi 

Common bent-toe 

gecko 

Salamanquesa Hemidactylus mabouia

SCINCIDAE Slippery back skink Santa Lucía Mabuya mabuya 

sloanii 

TEIIDAE Common ground 

lizard 

Siguana común Ameiva exsul 

TESTUDINIDAE Antillean painted turtle Jicotea Trachemys stejnegeri 

stejnegeri 

Green sea turtle (M) Peje blanco (M) Chelonia mydas 

Hawksbill (M) Carey (M) Eretmochelys 

imbricata 

Leatherback (M) Tinglar (M) Dermochelys coriacea 

Loggerhead (M) Cabezona (M) Caretta caretta 

Source: U.S. Navy Draft Environmental Impact for Vieques, 1979; Rivero, 1980; Pough, 1998; Saliva, 1994; Joglar, 2002; Puerto 

Rico Conservation Trust, 2002; Unpublished personal communications, 2005. 

I= Introduced species (Especies introducidas) 

M= Marine species (Especies marinas) 

P= Probability that species occurs on refuge and/or have unconfirmed reports (Probabilidad que estas especies 

existan en el refugio y/o hay reportes aun no confirmados) 

U= Species occurs in urban areas (Especies se encuentran en areas urbanas) 
Section B. Appendices 245

Birds / Aves 

Family English Name Spanish Name Scientific name 

ANATIDAE Blue-winged Teal Pato Zarcel Anas discors 

Lesser Scaup Pato Pechiblanco 

Menor Aythya affinis 

Northern Shoveler (P) Pato Cuchareta (P) Anas clypeata 

Ruddy Duck Pato Chorizo Oxyura jamaicensis 

West Indian Whistling 

Duck Chiriría Caribena Dendrocygna arborea 

White-cheeked Pintail Pato Quijada Colorada Anas bahamensis 

Red-breasted 

Merganser (P) 

Mergansa Piquilarga 

(P) Mergus serrator 

PODICIPEDIDAE Pied-billed Grebe Zaramago Podylymbus podiceps 

SULIDAE Brown Booby Boba Parda Sula leucogaster 

PELECANIDAE Brown Pelican Pelícano Pardo Pelecanus occidentales 

FREGATIDAE Magnificent Frigatebird Tijereta Fregata magnificens 

ARDEIDAE Black-crowned Night 

Heron Yaboa Real Nycticorax nycticorax 

Cattle Egret Garza Ganadera Bubulcus ibis 

Great Blue Heron Garzón Cenizo Ardea herodias 

Great Egret Garza Real Casmoredius albus 

Green-backed Heron Martinete Butorides striatus 

Least Bittern Martinetito Ixobrychus exilis 

Little Blue Heron Garza Azul Egretta caerulea 

Snowy Egret Garza Blanca Egretta thula 

Tricolored Heron Garza Pechiblanca Egretta tricolor 

Yellow-crowned Heron Yaboa Común Nycticorax violacea 

ACCIPITRIDAE Broad-winged Hawk (P) Guaraguao de bosque 

(P) Buteo platypterus 

Osprey Aguila pescadora Pandion haliaetus 

Red tailed Hawk Guaraguao colirrojo Buteo jamaicensis 

PHOENICOPTERIDAE Greater Flamingo (P) Flamenco(P) Phoenicopterus ruber 

RALLIDAE Common Gallinule Garalleta Común Gallinula chloropus 

American Coot Gallinazo Americano Fulica americana 

Caribbean Coot Gallinazo Caribeno Fulica caribaea 
246 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Family English Name Spanish Name Scientific name 

HAEMATOPODIDAE American 

Oystercatcher Ostrero Haematopus palliatus 

RECURVIROSTRIDAE Black-necked Stilt Viuda Himantopus mexicanus 

CHARADRIIDAE Black-bellied Plover Playero Cabezón Pluvialis squatarola 

Killdeer Playero Sabanero Charadrius vociferus 

Semipalmated Plover Playero Acollarado Charadrius 

semipalmatus 

Snowy Plover Playero Blanco Charadrius 

alexandrinus 

Wilson's Plover Playero Marítimo Charadrius wilsonia 

SCOLOPACIDAE Wilson’s Snipe Becasina Gallinago delicata 

Greater Yellowlegs Playero Guineilla 

Mayor Tringa melanoleuca 

Lesser Yellowlegs Playero Guineilla 

Menor Tringa flavipes 

Least Sandpiper Playero Menudillo Calidris minutilla 

Ruddy Rurnstone Playero Turco Arenaria interpres 

 Semipalmated 

Sandpiper Playero Gracioso Calidris pusilla 

Short-billed Dowitcher Agujeta piquicorta Limnodromus griseus 

Stilt Sandpiper Playero Patilargo Calidris himantopus 

Spotted Sandpiper Playero Coleador Actitis macularius 

Willet Playero Aliblanco Catoptrophorus 

semipalmatus 

LARIDAE Laughing Gull Gaviota Gallega Larus atricilla 

Least Tern Charrancito Sterna antillarum 

Roseate tern Palometa Sterna dougallii 

Royal Tern Charran Real Thalasseus maximus 

COLUMBIDAE Common GroundDove Rolita Columbina passerina 

Mourning Dove Tórtola Rabilarga Zenaida macroura 

White-winged Dove Tórtola Aliblanca Zenaida asiatica 

Zenaida Dove Tórtola Cardosantera Zenaida aurita 

Puerto Rican Plain 

pigeon (P) 

Paloma Sabanera 

(P) 

Patagioenas inornata 

wetmorei 

Scaly-naped Pigeon Paloma Turca Patagioenas squamosa 
Section B. Appendices 247

Family English Name Spanish Name Scientific name 

White-crowned Pigeon Paloma Cabeciblanca Patagioenas 

leucocephala 

Bridled Quail-dove Paloma Perdiz de 

Martinica Geotrygon mystacea 

Key west Quail-dove Paloma Perdiz Aurea Geotrygon chrysia 

Ruddy Quail-dove Paloma Perdiz Rojiza Geotrygon montana 

CUCULIDAE Mangrove Cuckoo Pájaro Bobo Menor Coccyzus minor 

Yellow-billed Cuckoo Pájaro Bobo 

Piquiamarillo Coccyzus americanus 

Smooth-billed Ani Judío Crotophaga ani 

CAPRIMULGIFORMES Antillean Nighthawk Querequequé Chordeiles gundlachi 

Chuck-will's-widow Guabairo de la 

Carolina 

Caprimulgus 

carolinensis 

TROCHILIDAE Antillean Crested 

Hummingbird Zumbadorcito Crestado Orthorhynchus cristatus 

Green-throated Carib Zumbador Pechiazul Eulampis holosericeus 

ALCEDINIDAE Belted Kingfisher Martín Pescador Ceryle alcyon 

PICIDAE Puerto Rican 

Woodpecker 

Carpintero de Puerto 

Rico 

Melanerpes 

portoricensis 

TYRANNIDAE Caribbean Elaenia Juí Blanco Elaenia martinica 

Gray Kingbird Pitirre Tyrannus dominicensis 

Loggerhead Kingbird Clérigo Tyrannus caudifasciatus 

Puerto Rican 

Flycatcher Juí de Puerto Rico Myarchus antillarum 

HIRUNDINIDAE Caribbean Martin Golondrina de Iglesias Progne dominicensis 

MIMIDAE Northern Mockingbird Ruiseñor Mimus polyglottos 

Pearly-eyed Thrasher Zorzal Pardo Margarops fuscatus 

STURNIDAE Hill Myna Maina de Colinas Gracula religiosa 

PARULIDAE Adelaide's warbler Reinita Mariposera Dendroica adelaidae 

Yellow Warbler Canario de mangle Dendroica petechia 

Bananaquit Reinita Común Coereba flaveola 

EMBERIZIDAE Black faced Grassquit Gorrión Negro Tiaris bicolor 

Yellow-faced Grassquit Gorrión Barba Amarilla Tiaris olivacea 

Grasshopper Sparrow Gorrión Chicharra Ammodramus 

savannarum 

Indigo Bunting Gorrion Azul Passerina cyanea 
248 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Family English Name Spanish Name Scientific name 

ICTERIDAE Yellow-shouldered 

Blackbird (P) 

Mariquita de Puerto 

Rico (P) Agelaius xanthomus 

 Greater Antillean 

Grackle Chango Quiscalus niger 

Shiny Cowbird Tordo lustroso Molothrus bonariensis 

ESTRILDAE Bronze Mannikin Diablito Lonchura cucullata 

Source: U.S. Navy Draft Environmental Impact for Vieques, 1979; Raffaele, H. 1989; Saliva, 1994; Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, 2002; 

Oberle, M. 2003; Unpublished personal observations from Refuge Manager, 2005. 

P= Probability that species occurs on refuge and/or have unconfirmed reports (Probabilidad que estas especies existan en 

el refugio y/o hay reportes aun no confirmados) 

Fish / Peces 

Family English Name Spanish Name Genus & Species 

SERRANIDAE Rock hind Cabramora Epinephelus 

adscensionis 

Nassau grouper Cherna Epinephelus striatus 

Graysby Cherna enjambre Epinephelus 

cruentatus 

Coney Mantequilla Epinephelus fulva 

Red hind Mero cabrilla Epinephelus guttatus 

Red grouper Mero guasa Epinephelus morio 

Harlequin bass Guaseta harlequin Serranus tigrinus 

Butter hamlet Vaca Hypoplectrus unicolor 

GRAMMIDAE Fairy basslet Gramma Gramma loreto 

APOGONIDAE Flamefish Cardenal candela Apagon maculatus 

Belted cardinal fish Cardenal listado Apagon maculatus 

Belted cardinalfish Cardenal listado Apagon townsendi 

PRIACANTHIDAE Bigeye Rey Priacanthus arenatus 

Glasseye snapper Toro Priacanthus 

cruentathus 
Section B. Appendices 249

Family English Name Spanish Name Genus & Species 

HOLOCENTRIDAE Squirrelfish Candil Holocentrus rufus 

Dusky squirrelfish Gallito Holocentrus vexillarius 

Long jaw squirrelfish Gallo Holocentrus 

adscencionis 

Long spine squirrelfish Gallo bocón Holocentrus marianus 

Reef squirrelfish Gallo de arrecifes Holocentrus coruscus 

Black bar soldier fish Toro Myripristis jacobus 

POMADASYIDAE White grunt Boquicolorado Haemulon plumieri 

Spanish grunt Colombiano Haemulon 

macrostomum 

French grunt Condenado Haemulon 

flavolineatum 

Cotton wick Jeniguana Haemulon melanurum 

Tomtate Mulita Haemulon 

aurolineatum 

Blue stripped grunt Ronco amarillo Haemulon sciurus 

Smallmouth grunt Saboga Haemulon 

chrysargyreum 

Margate Viuda Haemulon album 

SPARIDAE Jolt head porgy Bajonado Calamus bajonado 

KYPHOSIDAE Bermuda chub Chopa blanca Kyphosus sectatrix 

MULLIDAE Yellow goatfish Salmonete amarrillo Mulloidichthys 

martinicus 

PEMPHERIDAE Glassy sweeper Barrigón clareado Pempheris 

schomburgki 

CHAETODONTIDAE Four eye butterfly fish Mariposa Chaetodon capistratus 

Banded butterfly fish Mariposa rayada Chaetodon striatus 

POMACANTHIDAE Queen angelfish Isabelita Holocanthus ciliaris 

Gray angelfish Isabelita gris Pomacantus 

arcuathus 
250 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Family English Name Spanish Name Genus & Species 

Rock beauty Isabelita medioluto Holocanthus tricolor 

French angelfish Isabelita negra Pomacantus paru 

POMACENTRIDAE Long fin damselfish Damisela aletilarga Pomacentrus 

diencaeus 

Three spot damselfish Damisela amarrilla Pomacentrus 

planiformes 

Cocoa damselfish Damisela chocolate Pomacentrus variailis 

Yellowtail damselfish Damisela coliamarilla Microspathodon 

chrysurus 

Blue chromis Burrito Chromis cyanea 

Beaugregory Gregorio Pomacentrus 

leucostictus 

Brown chromis Jaqueda parda Chromis multileneata 

Dusky damselfish Leopoldito Pomacentrus 

dorsopunicans 

Sargeant major Sargento Abudefduf saxatilis 

Night sargeant Vieja prieta Abudefduf taurus 

LABRIDAE Hogfish Capitán Lachnolaimus 

maximus 

Spanish hogfish Loro capitán Bodianus rufus 

Pudding wife Capitán de piedras Halichoeres radiatus 

Slippery dick Doncella Halichoeres bivittatus 

Yellow head wrasse Doncella 

cabeciamarilla 

Halichoeres garnoti 

Blue head Doncella cabeciazul Thalassoma 

bifasciatum 

Black ear wrasse Doncella orejinegra Halichoeres poeyi 

Clown wrasse Doncella payasa Halichoeres 

maculipinna 

Painted wrasse Doncella pintada Halichoeres caudalis 

Pearly razor fish Navajón perlado Hemipteronotus 

novacula 
Section B. Appendices 251

Family English Name Spanish Name Genus & Species 

SCARIDAE Blue parrotfish Brindao Scarus coeruleus 

Stoplight parrotfish Chaporra Sparisoma viride 

Stripped parrotfish Cotorro Scarus croicensis 

Rainbow parrotfish Guacamayo Scarus guacamaia 

Midnight parrotfish Judío Scarus coelestinus 

Yellowtail parrotfish Loro coliamarillo Sparisoma rubripinne 

Redband parrotfish Loro banda colorada Sparisoma 

aurofrenatum 

Redtail parrotfish Loro colirojo Sparisoma 

chrysopterum 

Bucktooth parrotfish Loro dientón Sparisoma radians 

Princess parrotfish Princesa Scarus taeniopterus 

Queen parrotfish Reina Scarus vetula 

BLENNIIDAE Red lip blenny Blenio Boquicolorado Ophioblennius 

atlanticus 

GOBIIDAE Bridled goby Gobio brida Coryphopterus 

glaucofraenum 

Goldspot goby Gobio dorado Gnatholepsis 

thompsoni 

Sharknose goby Gobio hocicudo Gobiosoma evelynae 

Masked goby Gobio mascara Coryphopterus 

personatus 

BALISTIDAE Queen triggerfish Peje puerco Balistes veluta 

 Black durgon Japonesa Melichthys niger 

ACANTHURIDAE Blue tang Barbero Acanthurus coeruleus 

Doctor fish Cirujano Acanthurus chirurgus 

Ocean surgeon fish Médico Acanthurus bahianus 

MONACANTHIDAE Orange spotted filefish Lija motas naranja Cantherhinea pullus 
252 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Family English Name Spanish Name Genus & Species 

OSTRACIIDAE Smooth trunkfish Chapín liso Lactophrys tirqueter 

TETRAODONTIDAE Sharp nose puffer Tamboril narizón Canthigaster rostrata 

DIODONTIDAE Porcupine fish Puerco espín Diodon hystrix 

SYNODONTIDAE Sand diver Doncella Snynodus intermedius 

MALACANTHIDAE Sand tilefish Jolocho Malacanthus plumieri 

BOTHIDAE Peacock flounder Lenguado lunado Bothus lunatus 

MURAENIDAE Spotted moray Morena moteada Gymnothorax moringa 

AULOSTOMIDAE Trumpet fish Trompetero Aulostomus maculatus 

CARANGIDAE Blue runner Cojinúa Caranx crysos 

Bar jack Guaymen blanco Caranx ruber 

Greater amberjack Medregal Seriola drumerili 

Rainbow runner Salmón Elagatis bipinnulata 

GERREIDAE Yellow fin mojarra Muniama Gerres cinereus 

LUTJANIDAE Mahogany snapper Arrayado de yerbas Lutjanus mahagoni 

Schoolmaster Pargo amarillo Lutjanus apodus 

Mutton snapper Sama Lutjanus analis 

Yellow tail snapper Colirrubia Ocyurus chrysurus 

SCIAENIDAE High hat Verdugo rayado Equetus acuminatus 

SPHYRAENIDAE Great barracuda Picúa Phyraena barracuda 

SCOMBRIDAE Spanish mackarel Sierra Scomberomorus 

maculatus 

DASYATIDAE Southern ray Raya Dasyatis americana 

MYLIOBATIDAE Spotted eagle ray Raya moteada Aetobatus narinari 

MOBULIDAE Manta ray Manta raya Manta birostris 
Section B. Appendices 253

Family English Name Spanish Name Genus & Species 

CARCHARHINIDAE Bull shark Tiburón toro Carcharhinus leucas 

Reef shark Tiburón de arrecife Carcharhinus perezi 

Lemon shark Tiburón limon Negaprion brevirostris 

Tiger shark Tiburón tigre Galeocerdo cuvieri 

ORECTOLOBIDAE Nurse shark Tiburón gata Ginglymostoma 

cirratum 

SPHYRNIDAE Great hammer head 

shark 

Tiburón martillo Sphyrna mokarran 

Smooth hammer head 

shark 

Cornuda Sphyrna zygaena 

ALBULIDAE Bonefish Macabi Albula vulpes 

ELOPIDAE Tarpon Sábalo Megalops atlanticus 

CENTROPOMIDAE Fat snook Robalo Centropomus 

parallelus 

Source: U.S. Navy Draft Environmental Impact for Vieques, 1979; Peterson Field Guides-Atlantic Coast Fishes, 1986; Puerto Rico 

Conservation Trust, 2002; Unpublished personal communications, 2005. 
254 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Mammals / Mamiferos 

Family English Name Spanish Name Genus & Species 

MOLOSSIDAE Velvet free-tailed bat Murciélago de techos Molossus molussus

Brazilian fee-tailed bat 

(P) 

Murciélago viejo Tadarida brasiliensis 

NOCTILIONIDAE Fishing bat Murciélago pescador Noctilio leporinus

PHYLLOSTOMIDAE Cave bat (P) Murciélago hocico de 

cerdo

Brachyphylla 

cavernarum

Fruit bat Murciélago frutero 

común

Artibeus jamaicensis 

Red fruit bat Murciélago frutero 

nativo

Stenoderma rufum 

VESPERTILIONIDAE Big brown bat (P) Murciélago alí-oscuro Eptesicus fuscus 

CANIDAE Dog (F/I) Perro Canis familiaris 

FELIDAE Cat (F/I) Gato Felis catus 

VIVERRIDAE Mongoose (I) Mangosta Herpestes javanicus 

EQUIDAE Horse (F/I) Caballo Equus caballus 

BOVIDAE Cow (F/I) Vaca Bos taurus 

MURIDAE Mouse (F/I) Ratón Mus spp. 

Rat (F/I) Rata Rattus spp. 

BALAENOPTERIDAE Fin whale (M) Ballena de aleta Balaenoptera 

physalus 

Humpback whale (M) Ballena jorobada Megaptera 

novaeangliae

Sei whale (M) Ballena sei Balaenoptera borealis

DELPHINIDAE Atlantic Spotted 

Dolphin (M) 

Delfin moteado Stenella frontalis 

Bottle-nose dolphin (M) Bufeo Tursiops truncatus 

Short fin pilot whale 

(M) 

Ballena piloto Globichephala 

macrorhyncus 

PHYSETERIDAE Sperm whale (M) Cachalote Physeter 

macrocephalus 

TRICHECHIDAE Antillean manatee (M) Manatí Trichechus manatus 

manatus 

Source: U.S. Navy Draft Environmental Impact for Vieques, 1979; Saliva, 1994; Mignucci, 2001; Puerto Rico Conservation Trust, 2002; 

Unpublished personal communications, 2005. 

F= Feral species (Especies domesticas que retornan a un estado salvaje) 

I= Introduced species (Especies introducidas) 

M= Marine species (Especies marinas) 

P= Probability that species occurs on refuge and/or have unconfirmed reports (Probabilidad que estas especies existan en 

el refugio y/o hay reportes aun no confirmados) 
Section B. Appendices 255

APPENDIX VI. WILDERNESS REVIEW 

Wilderness Review 

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

May 10, 2005 

The project leader for the Caribbean Islands National Wildlife Refuge, the manager of the Vieques 

National Wildlife Refuge, and members of the Vieques comprehensive conservation planning team 

met at the Vieques Refuge on May 10, 2005, to conduct the refuge=s wilderness review. The review 

team included: 

Susan Silander, Project Leader, Caribbean Islands National Wildlife Refuge 

Oscar Diaz-Marrero, Refuge Manager, Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Joseph Schwagerl, Deputy Project Leader, Caribbean Islands National Wildlife Refuge 

Rosa Maria Quiles, Planner, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources 

Gisella Burgos, Outreach Specialist, Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

James Oland, Special Assistant, Region 4, Refuges 

The wilderness review is a required component of the comprehensive conservation plan. 

The Wilderness Act defines a Wilderness Area as an area of federal land retaining its primeval 

character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is managed so 

as to preserve its natural conditions and which: 

1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of 

man=s work substantially unnoticeable; 

2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined type of recreation; 

3) has at least 5,000 contiguous roadless acres or is of sufficient size to make practicable its 

preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; 

4) does not substantially exhibit the effects of logging, farming, grazing, or other extensive 

development or alteration of the landscape, or its wilderness character could be restored through 

appropriate management, at the time of review; 

5) is a roadless island; and 

6) may contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, education, scenic, or historic 

value. 

During the inventory phase of the wilderness review, the emphasis is on an assessment of wilderness 

character within the inventory unit. Special values (i.e., ecological, geological, scenic, and historical) 

should be identified, but are not required. The determination to recommend (or not recommend) a 

Wilderness Study Area to Congress for wilderness designation will be made through the 

comprehensive conservation plan decision-making process. 
256 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

During the meeting, the team discussed the criteria for wilderness designation and reviewed maps, 

photographs, and personal knowledge for identification of potential wilderness study areas. The 

following is a summary of the determinations: 
Section B. Appendices 257

Western Vieques Refuge Lands 

The western portion of the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge was transferred from the Navy to the 

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, in 2001. This parcel is approximately 3,100 

acres. Former military uses included storage for munitions in bunkers, a communications facility at 

Monte Pirata, an open burn/open disposal site near Punta Boca Quebrada, and recreational uses at 

Punta Arenas (Green Beach). There are roads, power lines, water pipelines, bridges, remains of 

former agricultural facilities, bunkers, and communications facilities currently on the property. Prior 

to the military presence, the parcel was used extensively for agricultural purposes. While most of the 

western lands have been heavily impacted by agricultural and military activities, there are unique 

resources on the relatively inaccessible slopes of Monte Pirata and in the mangrove forests 

surrounding the lagoons. 

Attached map from the Transfer Environmental Assessment shows the roads and sites of 

contamination on western Veiques. The areas indicated as “Conservation Zones” were transferred to 

the Fish and Wildlife Service and now constitute the western portion of the Vieques Refuge. 

Eastern Vieques Refuge Lands 

The eastern portion of the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge was transferred from the Navy to the 

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, in 2003. The eastern refuge is approximately 

14,671 acres, including a 900-acre site known as the “Live Impact Area.” The eastern lands were 

used by the Navy and other military units for aerial bombing, ship-to-shore gun fire, artillery, and small 

arms practice and infantry maneuvers from the mid-1940s until they were transferred. Prior to the 

military uses, sugarcane production and other agricultural activities had brought about the clearing of 

most of the eastern refuge. Numerous roads throughout the refuge were established to provide 

access for both the agricultural and military activities. The Navy is still utilizing these roads for access 

to conduct clean-up from their former activities on these lands. In addition to the roads, there are 

numerous structures and artifacts from the military and former agricultural activities. The Observation 

Post, near the eastern end of the refuge, provided an overview of the range area where numerous 

pieces of old military equipment used for targets still remain. The major development on the eastern 

refuge is at Camp Garcia, the former Navy headquarters for activities on the eastern maneuver area. 

Although nearly all of the lands on eastern Vieques have been impacted, coastal lagoons, 

surrounding mangrove forests, beaches, and quebradas (i.e., intermittent streams) provide natural 

settings and habitats that can be enhanced or expanded through management activities. See 

attached maps and photograph. 

Summary of Findings 

There are no areas within the eastern or western Vieques Refuge tracts that would meet the criteria 

for wilderness study areas and, therefore, the wilderness review team recommends that no further 

consideration be given to wilderness designation for any portions of the Vieques Refuge. 
258 Vieques National W

Western Vieques Map from NASD Transfer EA. Former conservation zones are now refuge lands. 
Section B. Appendices 

Western Vieques Refuge with Solid Waste Management Units (SWMU 4 and SWMU 6) 
260 Vieques National W

Eastern Vieques Roads and Facilities from Navy, Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan 2003. thorn scrub area has been impacted by former agriculture as well as military activities. 
Section B. Appendices 

Eastern Vieques Roads and Facilities from Navy, Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan 2003 
262 Vieques National W

Eastern Vieques Photo from Navy Expanded Range Assessment. Shows sites of military activities affecVieques. 
Section B. Appendices 263
264 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

APPENDIX VII. DEMOGRAPHIC 

STATISTICS 
Section B. Appendices 265
266 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
Section B. Appendices 267
268 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

APPENDIX VIII. PUBLIC SCOPING 

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC SCOPING COMMENTS AND ISSUES 

Y - indicates comments favoring the activity 

N - indicates comments opposed to the activity 

Public Use, Programs and Access

o Hunting (Y/N) 

o Fishing (Y/N) 

 Lagoons 

 Night (with permit) 

o Crabbing (Y/N) 

 with permits 

o Horseback riding (Y/N) 

o Grazing (Y/N) 

o Camping 

 with permits 

 educational groups 

 family-oriented 

o Extended hours 

o Access to additional areas of the refuge 

o Beach use 

o Passive activities - volleyball (Y/N) 

o Environmental education and Interpretation of cultural/natural resources in 

different areas of the refuge 

 Volunteers or interpretive rangers 

(walk/talk) 

 Vieques residents, students 

 Educational activities with the community 

o Kayaking/Canoeing 

o Resource photography 

o Wildlife observation 

o Tours 

o 4 Track (No) 

o Rock climbing 

o Surfing 

o Reading 

o Swimming 

o Boating (Y/N) 

 Anchoring area 

 Monitor to reduce resource damage (e.g., sea turtle and manatee) 

o Low cost entrance fee 

o Area to play with dogs 

o Lifeguards 

o Tennis court 

o Brochure/map 

o Nude bathing 

o Boat ramp 
Section B. Appendices 269

o Bike riding 

o Running/jogging 

o Planting and coconut collection 

o Carrying capacity – to have the natural environment undamaged 

o Jet ski (N) 

o No fire/BBQ’s 

o Kite flying 

Summary of Pubic Comments and Issues Refuge Facilities

o Use of roads (Y/N) 

 Eliminate off road vehicle use 

o Scenic roads 

o Road improvements 

o Observation tower 

 Mount Pirata 

o Shaded areas 

o Gazebos 

o Interpretive/educational signs on land and underwater 

o Directional signs 

o Brush removal 

o Barrier removal 

o Hiking trails through different terrain, long, short 

o Biking trails 

o Boardwalk 

o Visitor Center/in collaboration with local agencies, groups 

o Bathrooms/showers 

o Morer trash cans 

o Fish and Wildlife Service office on refuge 

o Rehabilitate Camp Garcia for environmental education/historical seminars and 

eco-lodging 

o OP-1(Observatory/Marine economics laboratory) 

o Water available for hikers “oasis” 

Summary of Pubic Comments and Issues Commercial Activities

o Vendors in refuge (Y/N) 

 Food 

 Souvenir shop/beach use items 

o Ecotourism (Y/N) 

 Horseback riding tours 

 Natural and cultural resources tours 

 Agricultural tourism 

o Logging 

Summary of Pubic Comments and Issues Security and Safety

o Use of Bahía Puerto Ferro during hurricanes to protect boats 

o Provide security to reduce theft 

o Search and rescue in remote areas 
270 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Summary of Pubic Comments and Issues Natural Resource Management

o Invasive species 

o Management of endangered species 

o Monitor road and trail erosion especially if they are protected areas such as 

mangroves 

o Reforestation with native species 

o Agricultural projects 

o Sea turtle investigation 

o Plant nursery 

o Species identification 

o Areas to raise animals and plants 

o Wildlife first 

o Strong monitoring and evaluation program 

o Program to minimize the impact of exotic species 

o Identification of species/develop plan to ensure the health of the populations of 

imperiled species. 

o Sea turtle nesting areas closed to the public 

o Research permits 

o Prohibit changing contour of land 

Summary of Pubic Comments and Issues Management of Cultural Resources

o Cultural resource investigation 

o Archaeology 

o Restore archaeological facilities and historic monuments 

 Sugar mills, lighthouses, wells, and economic centers 

Summary of Pubic Comments and Issues U.S. Navy Activities

o Decontamination/cleanup 

 Delineate priority of cleanup-Navy RESPONSIBLE 

 Include plan to monitor and assess the cleanup progress 

 Clean-up level 

Summary of Pubic Comments and Issues Other

o Return Ffish and Wildlife Service land to the municipal government of Vieques 

 1940 law 

o Return Fish and Wildlife Service land to “Fideicomiso Comunitario de Terrenos” 

 Amend law that established refuge 

 900 wilderness area 

 Housing 

o Access to and use of the landing strip or airport 

o Planting/agriculture 

o Aquaculture 

o Ecotourism development 

o Viequenses develop comprehensive conservation plan--not Fish and Wildlife 

Service 

o Prohibit any military activities 

o Not permit Fish and Wildlife Service activities 

o Recruit Viequenses to help manage resources 

o Plan intensive public use to have better clean-up 

o Reduce refuge acreage 
Section B. Appendices 271

Groups

Municipal Government of Vieques 

The Wilderness Society 

Jose Marcano & Associates (did not submit comments) 

Engineers, Architects, and Planners 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – National Marine Fisheries Service 

University of Puerto Rico-Humacao 

Air Sunshine 

Global Environmental Teaching- WI Center for Environmental Education 

VCHT 

Familia Viequense Pro Salud 

Total Written Comments: 78 total 

22 by mail 

11 by email 

3 by walk-in 

23 by drop box 

3 by fax 

26 from meeting comments 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Mail Email Walkin Drop

Box

Fax Meeting

comments

49 individuals attended November 10th public meeting 
272 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC REVIEW COMMENTS AND SERVICE RESPONSE 

This appendix summarizes all comments that were received on the Draft Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement for the Vieques National Wildlife 

Refuge. Public comments on this draft document were accepted from February 28, 2007 to 

April 30, 2007. 

A total of 43 individuals submitted comments on the Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

and Environmental Impact Statement, either in writing or at the public meeting held on March 

28, 2007. One group of nine citizens from Vieques submitted combined comments. 

All of the respondents who indicated a preference for one of the alternatives chose Alternative C 

(the proposed alternative). 

PUBLIC FORUMS 

During the February 28 to April 30, 2007 public review period, the refuge and planning staff 

hosted informational and public comment meetings on March 27 and 28 at the Vieques Multiple 

Use Center, in Isabel Segunda, Vieques, PR. Both meetings were scheduled from 5:00 PM to 

9:00 PM. At the informational meeting, on March 27th, several stations were set up in the 

meeting area with displays and posters to illustrate various aspects of the plan under 

consideration. The stations included information on the CCP process, wildlife management, 

administration, law enforcement, public uses, cleanup of former military materials, and fire 

management. Refuge and planning staff were available to discuss the plan and respond to any 

questions from the attendees. The March 28 public meeting began with a short formal 

presentation on the planning process and the draft plan. This presentation was followed by a 

facilitated public discussion process to receive public comments on the draft plan. Comments 

were presented and accepted in either Spanish or English. All comments were recorded and a 

transcription was made. In addition, simultaneous translation was provided in both Spanish and 

English. A total of 9 individuals provided comments during the public meeting. 

AFFILIATIONS OF RESPONDENTS 

 

The table below identifies the names and affiliations of respondents who commented on the 

Vieques Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement, either 

in writing or at the public meeting. 

Name of Respondent Affiliation/Address 

1. Dámaso Serrano López Mayor of Vieques/ Vieques, PR 

2. John Filippelli, Chief, Strategic 

Planning Branch Environmental Protection Agency, NY, NY 

3. Miles Croom, Asst Regional 

Administrator 

NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, St 

Petersburg, FL 

3(a) Madeline Rivera, Vieques Site 

Manager, U.S. Navy Vieques, PR 

4. Aida Belén Rivera Ruíz, Archaeologist State Historic Preservation Officer, 

Commonwealth of PR, San Juan, PR 

4(a) Angel D. Rodriguez Quiñones, 

President Planning Board, San Juan, PR 
Section B. Appendices 273

4(b) Javier Vélez Arocho, Secretary Puerto Rico Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources, San Juan, PR 

5. Andrew Page The Humane Society of the United States/ 

Jacksonville, VT 

6. Verónica Méndez-Gallardo Puerto Rican Ornithological Society, Inc./ San 

Juan, PR 

7. Elsie Aponte Florenciani Puerto Rico Conservation Trust/San Juan, PR 

8. Mark Martin Vieques Conservation & Historical Trust/ 

Vieques, PR 

9. Carlos R. Ventura Meléndez Asociación de Pescadores Unidos del Sur de 

Vieques, Inc. / Vieques, PR 

10. Barbara Rumore, President Vieques Humane Society and Animal Rescue/ 

Vieques, PR 

11. Dr. Marc Albrecht (Biology Professor) University of Nebraska / Kearney, NE 

12. Ana Rivera Rivera Servicios Científicos y Técnicos, Inc, San 

Juan, PR 

13. Paul H. Lutton Vieques, PR 

14. W.V. McConnell Tallahassee, FL 

15. Linda La Violette Vieques, PR 

16. José E. Bird Laborde Vieques, PR 

17. Priscilla and Dale Doucette Portland, ME / Vieques, PR 

18. Percida Velázquez Vieques, PR 

19. Rafael Rodríguez Vieques, PR 

20. Kathy Gannet Vieques, PR 

21. Claire Mowbray Vieques, PR 

22. José M. Rivera Acevedo Vieques, PR 

23. Miguel Angel Reyes de Jesús Vieques, PR 

24. José Santos Vieques, PR 

25. Ismael Guadalupe Ortíz Vieques, PR 

26. Deborah B. Santana Vieques, PR 

27. Daphne Gemmill Washington, DC 

28. Mariángeles Rivera Vieques, PR 

29. David Kerr Vieques, PR 

30. Community Recommendations (9 

individuals) Vieques,PR 

31. Marta Meléndez Vieques, PR 

32. Vieques Pirates Convention Vieques, PR 

 

The number of affiliations represented in the above table can be summarized as follows: elected 

officials, 1; federal agencies, 3; Commonwealth agencies, 3; nongovernmental organizations, 8; 

and, public citizens (general public), 28. 

COMMENT MEDIA 

The types of media used to deliver the comments received by the refuge and planning staffs are 

categorized as follows: oral (formally presented at the public meeting), 9; written letter, 23; and 

e-mail, 11. 
274 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

GEOGRAPHIC ORIGIN OF RESPONDENTS 

The geographic origins of the individual respondents who submitted comments are: Vieques, 

Puerto Rico, 31; Puerto Rico (outside of Vieques), 6; Vermont, 1; Florida, 2; Maine, 1; 

Washington DC, 1; and New York, 1. 

SUMMARY OF CONCERNS AND THE SERVICE’S RESPONSES 

The public comments received during the comment period covered a wide range of issues. In 

order to facilitate the responses, similar comments about a given issue have been combined 

and a single Service response is given. The numbers in parentheses after the comment identify 

the respondent(s) who expressed concern about the issue identified in the comment. 

GENERAL COMMENTS 

Comment: (1, 9, 16, 19, 20, 28) Several of the respondents commented about the history the 

Vieques Refuge as a former Naval training area and the struggle of the Viequenses to have the 

Navy leave. Comments were also received regarding the desire of the respondents to have the 

refuge lands or portions of the refuge lands transferred from the Department of the Interior to a 

Puerto Rican agency, the people of Puerto Rico or Vieques and to expedite or ensure the 

cleanup of contamination from former military activities 

Service Response: Most respondents recognized that the establishment of the refuge was 

through a Congressional Act and that transfers of any lands assigned to the refuge under that 

Act would require further Congressional action. The cleanup of unexploded ordnance and 

contamination from former military use is being conducted in accordance with the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) with 

regulatory oversight from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Commonwealth’s 

Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and in coordination with the Department of the Interior. 

Although many of the sites being cleaned are on the Vieques NWR, the Navy is the lead agency 

responsible for the cleanup. The Department of the Interior (FWS), Navy, EPA and EQB are 

participants in the decision-making process for the cleanup in accordance with a Federal 

Facilities Agreement. Since the FWS does not have the lead role in this process, we have not 

provided detailed discussions of the cleanup process in this plan. While the refuge is not 

directly responsible for the cleanup, Service representatives are working closely with the Navy, 

PR Environmental Quality Board, and EPA to identify sites where hazards exist and where 

hazards have been removed. 

Comment: (20) One comment expressed concern about the lack of information on the cleanup 

of contaminants and unexploded ordnance on the refuge and pointed out that the CCP/EIS did 

not present an evaluation of this situation. Several questions that need to be addressed with 

regard to the contaminants, unexploded ordnance, and cleanup were presented. These 

included: What contaminants are found on the lands and waters? What risk do these present to 

the community and natural resources? What is the timeframe for cleanup and will it cost? Is 

there a defined cleanup plan? 

Service Response: Cleanup of contaminants is a significant concern for the Service as well as 

the community; however, the purpose of the CCP is to provide a plan for the long-term 

management of the refuge. While the factors identified are very relevant to the future 

management of some areas of the refuge, the plan was developed with an awareness of the 

areas of major potential problems but also with the assumption that the refuge would be cleaned 
Section B. Appendices 275

to permit the proposed refuge management programs and public use activities that are included 

in the CCP/EIS. The identification of contaminants, assessment of the associated risks, and 

cleanup plans are being carried out by the Navy through the CERCLA cleanup process. That 

process provides for participation of the public as well as the Service, EPA, and PR 

Environmental Quality Board in the identification of priorities for the cleanup. 

Comment: (4(b)) The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental 

Resources provided comments identifying several areas where the DNER jurisdiction overlaps 

with that of the Service. Some of the specific areas mentioned include: natural resource law 

enforcement; management of beach uses; endangered species management; recovery of plant 

and animal species; hunting and fishing regulations; and fire management. 

Service Response: These and other program activities identified in the document will require 

close coordination between the Service and the DNER to ensure compliance with 

Commonwealth environmental regulations and management policies, as well as Federal and 

FWS regulations and policies. The Service has specifically identified several projects in the 

CCP/EIS that will require consultation, coordination, and/or approval from the Commonwealth 

DNER or other agencies before they can be implemented. Although the plan does not 

specifically reference coordination with DNER for all activities, the Service recognizes the 

expertise, knowledge, and jurisdiction of the DNER divisions and will continue to consult with 

the appropriate offices to ensure our management programs are consistent and compatible. 

Comment: (4(a), 8, 11, 20, 23, 28) Several comments addressed the issues of community 

involvement and expressed a desire to ensure the opportunity for continued involvement in the 

planning process for the Service. The comments included: Involve the local community; allow 

the community to have more input and involvement; continue community outreach programs; ... 

communication is key no matter what alternative is followed; and, how can the community 

participate after implementation of the plan and ask if the Service is following the plan? 

Service Response: One of the goals (Goal 6) established during the initial planning for the 

refuge is the following: Develop effective and open means of communication with Vieques 

citizens, interested groups, and organizations to raise public awareness of refuge programs, 

management decisions, and the mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National 

Wildlife Refuge System. Some of the strategies established to accomplish this goal include: 

Development and implementation of a formal Outreach Plan to ensure community awareness; 

Conducting outreach opportunities by providing one- on-one contact through house-to-house 

visits or Barrio meetings; Supporting the establishment of a cooperating association, and; 

Meeting regularly with local and state agencies and non-governmental organizations to 

coordinate activities. Additional opportunities will be available for the community to meet with 

and provide input on specific activities during the development of “step-down” plans. 

Comment: (4(a), 18) The Puerto Rico Planning Board and others stressed the high level 

of unemployment and poverty on the island of Vieques and recommended that the Service 

give priority to the residents of Vieques for any available positions at the Vieques Refuge. 

Service Response: While several of the positions at the refuge are already filled by “Viequenses,” 

some positions require specific training, experience, and qualifications that may limit our ability to 

hire from the local community. Although direct job opportunities with the FWS may be limited, the 

Service and the refuge are committed to working with the community to create opportunities for the 

residents of Vieques. As noted in the response to the previous comments, the FWS will meet with 

local and Commonwealth agency personnel to coordinate activities. 
276 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Comment: (3) NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service commented that FWS should 

prepare a Biological Evaluation and conduct an Endangered Species Act Section 7 

consultation and in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, an Essential Fish Habitat 

consultation with NMFS. NMFS also noted that the Magnuson-Stevens Act should be 

included in Appendix III, relevant legal mandates. 

Service Response: The primary activities with potential for impacting species and habitats 

under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service are the removal of rock groins 

and jetties and the restoration of lagoon hydrology. These activities will require detailed 

planning and coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Commonwealth of Puerto 

Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, and the National Marine Fisheries 

Service during the permitting process when specific details of project location and resources 

that could be impacted are known. The Service will conduct appropriate endangered species 

and essential fish habitat consultations at that time. The Fish and Wildlife Service does not 

have jurisdiction over the waters surrounding the refuge, but has responded to NMFS in an 

official correspondence regarding initiation of consultations and initiated coordination to ensure 

activities within the refuge do not adversely impact the adjacent aquatic resources. We have 

included the Magnuson-Stevens Act in Appendix III. 

Comment: (7) The PR Conservation Trust noted that the Draft CCP/EIS provides a new 

baseline for the re-drafting and re-conceptualization of the Management Plan for the Western 

Vieques Conservation Areas of November 2002. A revised Management Plan [for western 

Vieques conservation areas] should be developed by DNER, USFWS, and the Trust by 

November 2007. 

Service Response: We concur that the Cooperative Management Plan should be reviewed 

and revised by the Trust, DNER and USFWS. We have included additional comments in 

Chapter I of the CCP/EIS to recognize the collaboration between our organizations and the 

relationship between these two management plans. We believe that the completion of the CCP 

for Vieques Refuge could provide an opportunity for the Trust, DNER, and FWS to evaluate our 

respective management goals and programs and to identify areas of future collaboration in the 

management of the Conservation Areas on and surrounding Vieques. 

Comment: (7) The PR Conservation Trust noted that activities within the Western Vieques 

Conservation Areas should require further discussions among representatives of the FWS and 

the Trust. These discussions should include, among other issues regarding public access and 

public uses, the identification of areas for the collection of plant material, land crabbing, and 

resource extraction, hunting, interpretative and environmental programming, camping, 

commercial activities, historical and archaeological sites, and coordination of law enforcement 

activities. The Trust requested participation with the FWS planning team in the development of 

the Public Use Management Plan and is interested in collaborating with the FWS in an advisory 

role in the development of the carrying capacity study and the visitor satisfaction and use 

patterns evaluation, proposed in the CCP/EIS as integral components of the Public Use Plan. 

Service Response: We agree that implementation of portions of the proposed plan will 

necessitate close coordination between the FWS and the Trust. During the development of the 

proposed plan, the planning team envisioned coordination with the Trust during the 

development of the detailed step down plans and specific project proposals. We agree that the 

participation of the Trust and Commonwealth DNER during the development of the Public Use 

Management Plan will be very important to the development of a plan that accomplishes the 

goals of all entities. 
Section B. Appendices 277

Comment: (7) The CCP/EIS should include monitoring and evaluation guidelines or 

parameters to assure effective future plan implementation. Each goal, objective, and strategy of 

the CCP/EIS should be directly related to specific monitoring and evaluation criteria. Therefore, 

the document should include a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan or Program. 

Service Response: We agree that monitoring and evaluation are an important component of 

any long-term management program. Step-down plans scheduled for completion in 2008 

include Habitat Management and Fish and Wildlife Population Management Plans. Inventory 

and monitoring is an integral part of these plans and is utilized to guide “adaptive management” 

for specific activities. If the inventory and monitoring indicate a need for “adaptive management” 

program changes, the CCP and step-down plan strategies will be amended as necessary. The 

CCP will be reviewed at least every five years to determine if there is a need for revision. 

This is an important issue for future management decisions. We are, therefore, including additional 

language about “adaptive management” and the monitoring and evaluation procedures in stepdown plans in the “Plan Amendment and Revision” section of the CCP/EIS. Further detailed 

discussion will become a part of the Plan Implementation Chapter of the Final CCP. 

Comment: (16) One commenter noted that the timeline for completion of projects is too far into 

the future and that to gain support of Vieques citizens, it is important to show progress. This 

commenter recommended a fast track program for projects requiring the least resources. 

Service Response: While some of the projects identified in the plan are scheduled for 

completion at indefinite times in the future, where possible, the planning team attempted to 

provide realistic timeframes for plan implementation. In some cases, plan components cannot 

be implemented until lands are cleaned of munitions, detailed designs are prepared, or stepdown plans are completed. The team believes that providing realistic and achievable 

timeframes for completion of projects is appropriate to avoid establishing an expectation on the 

part of the public that may not be achievable. 

Comment: (16) The fact that the agency’s mission is animals over people renders very little 

hope to most. Maybe the better agency to manage these lands would have been Parks. 

Service Response: Comment noted. For reference, the Fish and Wildlife Service mission is 

working with others, to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats 

for the continuing benefit of the American people. 

Comment: (12) Identify a timeframe to partially and completely revise the plan. 

Service Response: The commenter noted that the Service will conduct a review of the plan at 

least every five years. In addition, the planning process for refuges provides for revisions of the 

plan whenever new information becomes available or conditions change and modifications of 

the plan are necessary. The Service’s policy of “adaptive management” is also an instrumental 

part of all management programs on the refuge. This policy recognizes that conditions may 

change and new information may become available that dictate modifications of the ongoing 

programs. We agree that the flexibility to modify the plans and make adjustments to address 

changing conditions is critical to effective management. 
278 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

EDITORIAL COMMENTS/CLARIFICATION 

Comment: (6) The scientific names of birds should be included in the document. The Puerto 

Rican Ornithological Society (SOPI) prepared a catalog of scientific and common names of 

birds and provided it to the Service. 

Service Response: The English version of the document uses the common names of birds 

that are accepted by the American Ornithologists’ Union (AOU) in the text portions of the 

document. Since these names are standardized, the scientific names are only included on the 

list in Appendix V. We have used the information provided by SOPI to update and verify both 

the scientific and common (English and Spanish) names in the Appendix. 

Comment: (6) The official name of the organization is Puerto Rican Ornithological Society not 

Ornithological Society of Puerto Rico. 

Service Response: The name has been corrected in the document. 

Comment: (12) It was recommended that the Spanish version of the document be designated 

as “Plan Comprehensivo” instead of “Plan Abarcador”. 

Service Response: The use of “Comprehensivo” instead of “Abarcador” for the Spanish title of 

the document was discussed by the planning team. While “Comprehensivo” may be a more 

literal translation, the team felt that “Abarcador” provided a better sense of the nature and intent 

of the document for the intended Puerto Rican audience. 

Comment: (12) The comment recommended that we provide the mission, vision and goals of 

the FWS at the beginning of the document (in the Executive Summary or Introduction). 

Service Response: We have included the FWS mission and the Refuge System mission and 

goals prior to the Vieques Refuge specific goals. 

Comment: (26) The comment was made that we should clarify difference between the CCP 

and the FFA that is also being developed. 

Service Response: The Federal Facilities Agreement is referenced at several locations in the 

document, including in the discussion of Navy cleanup activities in Chapter III, in the strategies 

for Goal 4 of all alternatives and in the Contaminants/Hazardous Materials section of the 

Environmental Consequences Chapter. For reference additional clarification is provided here. 

The Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) is the long-term plan for management of the 

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge; whereas, the Federal Facilities Agreement is the document 

that is strictly related to the procedures to be followed by the Navy, EPA, PR Environmental 

Quality Board, and the Fish and Wildlife Service to achieve the cleanup of the former military 

lands. Although the activities related to both documents will be taking place on the refuge, the 

two documents are focused on different issues. The CCP was developed with the vision of a 

refuge that is cleaned to a level that normal refuge activities can be implemented. 

Comment: (12) It was noted that the plan is conceptual and does not provide detailed plans or 

precise sites for installations and suggested that the plan include preliminary locations, sites, 

and designs in order to evaluate the potential impacts. 
Section B. Appendices 279

Service Response: For some of the projects identified in this document, detailed plans, 

locations, and design will be developed in future documents. Step-down plans and specific 

project development proposals will include additional siting and design information and, where 

necessary, appropriate environmental documentation will be prepared. 

Comment: (12) The existing situation with regard to the levels of contamination and risk to 

public health and security is not clear. 

Service Response: As noted in the document, much of the refuge is currently closed to public 

access because of the contamination and ongoing cleanup activities. The cleanup is being carried 

out by the Navy in coordination with the refuge and oversight by EPA and the Puerto Rico EQB. 

Until currently contaminated areas are certified as safe, they will not be opened to public uses. 

 

Comment: (12) The draft document indicates that the fire plan is scheduled for completion in 2006. 

Service Response: Because of delays in the preparation of the Draft CCP/EIS, several of the 

dates originally established for development of step-down plans are no longer valid. They have 

been corrected in the final document. A draft fire plan has been developed and a revised 

version is being prepared for approval in 2007-2008. 

Comment: (12) The source of information for some of the figures is not included in the document. 

Service Response: Additional information has been included in the final document. 

Comment: (12) A comment was made that the periods for completion of actions identified in 

the plan are relatively long after approval of the plan and the strategies should be completed 

more rapidly. The examples given are scheduled for completion within 1 to 5 years. 

Service Response: Some of the timeframes identified are for the completion of step-down 

plans or components of step-down plans (e.g., A carrying capacity study will be a component of 

the public use management plan - 5 years) while others are for the initiation of activities that 

may continue for many years, such as surveys of key species in sub-tropical forest habitats (2 

years). The timeframe for establishment of an agreement for management of compatible 

recreational beach uses was given as five years. While some of the activities may be 

completed earlier (and we hope they are) and some may be delayed for a variety of reasons, we 

believe these timeframes are both realistic and achievable. 

Comment: (14) Figure 8 contour map incorrectly indicates all lines are at a 10 meter interval. 

Lower elevations are at a 1 meter interval. 

Service Response: Figure 8 has been corrected in the Final CCP/EIS. 

Comment: (14) (Page 164) Should there be a section on Noxious and Invasive Species 

on this page? 

Service Response: The discussion of noxious and invasive species in Chapter IV (the 

referenced section) has been included in the sections on fauna and flora rather than in a 

separate section. 
280 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Comment: (2) EPA recommends inclusion of the Federal Facilities Agreement between the 

Commonwealth, Navy, EPA and DOI be included as an appendix to the CCP/EIS or that it be 

made available so that the public may retrieve a copy of the document if so desired. (That 

document addresses the responsibilities and procedures for cleanup of unexploded ordnance 

and contaminants remaining from former military activities.) 

Service Response: If the approved FFA is available prior to the publication of this document, 

we will include a link to the online site. If it becomes available after this document is published, 

we will post it on the refuge planning site and/or the Caribbean Islands NWR complex site. 

FISH AND WILDLIFE POPULATIONS – SPECIES OF CONCERN 

Comment: (12) The plan does not include a current inventory of natural resources.

Service Response: The CCP provides a basis for the development of numerous additional 

step-down plans. While the appendices include available information on many of the resources 

to be managed under the plan, we also recognize that the information is not complete and will 

need to be continuously updated through inventories and assessments. This work has been 

initiated with the compilation of field verified plant inventories, bird surveys, and vegetation 

community analyses. Some of that data is included in Appendix V. Through the development 

of step-down plans, additional surveys and inventories will be identified and conducted. 

Comment: (10, 29) Feral animal control under Alternative A should receive same emphasis as 

other alternatives. Because of public safety concerns, the feral animal control program should 

be implemented as soon as feasible. One commenter provided extensive recommendation for 

mechanisms to remove feral animals and how to address feral animal issues. 

Service Response: Alternative A provides the current management scenario. Since limited 

feral animal control is currently being conducted, no major control activities are indicated in 

Alternative A. The other alternatives provide increased levels of management and staffing to 

conduct these programs. 

Comment: (7) One of the objectives identified under the issue of Mammals Management in 

the CCP/EIS is  ̈to conduct surveys to determine the population status of bat species on refuge 

lands ̈ (p. 89). The (Puerto Rico Conservation) Trust is currently supporting a research study on 

bats in the Western Vieques Conservation Areas.... The Trust is interested in sharing the 

results of this study with FWS, as well as collaborating in the potential future extension of the 

study area and the implementation of the study recommendations. 

Service Response: The Service is very interested in working with the Trust to develop a 

management program that can be carried out cooperatively to benefit the species that share 

the management areas. We appreciate the work that has already been initiated and are 

looking forward to working together with the Trust during these studies and future 

management for the bat species. 

Comment: (14) One commenter recommended language to address potential use of exotic 

species removed from the refuge as a source of fuel for power generation. 
Section B. Appendices 281

Service Response: We believe power generation on a large scale would require a consistent 

high volume of material. Under the proposed alternative, any removed exotic plant material 

could be utilized for power generation; however, the removal must be directed toward the 

management and restoration of the habitat. 

Comment: (14) The plan calls for the restoration of native species at the minimum rate of 25 

acres annually. Considering that there are about 6,000 acres of thornscrub on the EMA and 

perhaps 500 on the west end, this figure is woefully inadequate. The commenter recommended 

250 acres per year. 

Service Response: Our experience indicates that effective subtropical dry forest restoration 

requires extensive site preparation, planting of developed saplings and continuing maintenance 

until the plantings are well established. We believe that the 25-acre figure is realistic and can 

be accomplished with the manpower proposed in the preferred alternative. We do not believe 

we could effectively maintain more acreage than this and that to identify a higher goal would 

create an unachievable expectation. 

HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES 

Comment: (30) Protect the structures at the old Sugar Central on western Vieques and 

transfer these facilities to a community organization. 

Service Response: One of the strategies in the plan calls for the evaluation of historic and 

archaeological sites to determine which should be stabilized, which should be restored, and which 

should be subject to interpretation. The sites to be evaluated include the railroad and sugar industry 

remains at Punta Arenas, as well as other resources at other locations. The Service would be 

pleased to work with the community to protect and restore these sites; however, transfer of the 

lands cannot be accomplished without Congressional action. Through an appropriate agreement, a 

community organization could be authorized to manage some of these sites. 

Comment: (7) The Management Plan for the Western Vieques Conservation Areas states that  ̈a 

task force which includes representation from the Service, the Trust, the Department, the 

Department of Education, the Institute of Culture, the Special Commission of Vieques and Culebra, 

and the Center of Archaeological Studies of the University of Puerto Rico, was created to resolve 

some of the issues dealing with the protection of the historical and archaeological heritage of the 

transferred lands, including the education of the public on the importance of protecting such sites ̈ 

(p. 30). The Trust recommends that the CCP/EIS describes this experience as a positive 

collaborative effort that could be replicated at other historical and archaeological areas in Vieques, 

since this task force has already convened and could be easily re-established. 

Service Response: The protection, management, and interpretation of the historical and 

archaeological sites on PRCT and Service lands should be an integral part of the management 

for these areas. The Service’s Regional archaeologist is our primary point of contact for all 

activities relating to the historic and archaeological sites on the refuge lands. We agree that 

working cooperatively to identify potential resources and management alternatives could help 

both the Trust and Service accomplish our missions. We do, however, need to follow our 

respective policies for administration of these resources. 

Comment: (20) Consider the Camp Garcia entrance gate as a historic site and provide 

recognition of the people who protested the bombing. 
282 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Service Response: As part of the plan, the Service will evaluate historic and archaeological 

sites to determine which should be stabilized, which should be restored, and which should be 

subject to interpretation. 

Comment: (25) Maintain structures used for detention of civil disobedient arrestees as historic 

sites. 

Service Response: The building used for detention of the protestors is a historic site that will 

be considered for restoration, stabilization, and interpretation. See previous comment and 

response. 

Comment: (4) The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) stated objective for this issue 

(page 113) is to “provide interpretive signing and information related to the accessible historical 

and archaeological sites on the refuge.” The strategies presented to achieve this objective, 

however, appear to extend beyond providing information by also including site stabilization and 

restoration. The objective should be amended to reflect the stated issue of not just historical 

and archaeological site interpretation, but site conservation as well. 

Service Response: The objective was modified in the final CCP/EIS. 

Comment: (4) Under Socioeconomic Factors, page 164-165, it states that “Many activities 

proposed ... have virtually no potential to affect cultural resources.” We prefer instead that the 

statement reads: “are unlikely to affect cultural resources.” 

Service Response: We believe the wording proposed by the SHPO more accurately reflects 

the intent of this section and have changed the wording in the text of the document. 

Comment: (4) The State Historic Preservation Office provided several recommendations and 

clarification about inaccurate, inconsistent and outdated terminology used in the archaeological 

resources section of the draft document. 

Service Response: The Service has edited this portion of the document in accordance with 

the references provided by the SHPO and coordinated the final wording with that office. We 

appreciate the cooperation of the SHPO’s office to ensure the information in this document is 

clear and accurate. 

HABITATS - STUDIES 

Comment: (11) Detailed biological inventories need to be done throughout the refuge land and 

through time. The restoration of lagoons and mangroves cut off from normal hydrology by roads 

or earthmoving are also an important component of the management of the Vieques refuge. I 

am glad to see it in all alternatives, though not much is done beyond planning in Alternative A. 

Service Response: Alternative A is the current level of management and reflects only the level 

of work we could complete with our currently available resources. The work this commenter has 

completed with students will be incorporated into the step-down management plan for the 

mangrove forests. 

 
Section B. Appendices 283

Comment: (27) On the subject of opening up the lagoons, I would suggest that when you evaluate 

the needs that you clarify your objectives for doing so. Are you managing the lagoons for shorebirds 

and waders or waterfowl? They have different requirements. All too often, national wildlife refuges 

manage for game species and non-game species suffer. Given the important role Vieques plays as 

a wintering ground and stop-over for migrant shorebirds, I would seriously consider managing some 

of the lagoons, such as Playa Grande, and Puerto Ferro, for shorebirds. 

Service Response: The natural cycles of opening and closing of the lagoon connections to the 

sea have been impacted by human activities that do not permit the normal processes to 

function. The intent of this project is to periodically ensure the lagoons are opened to restore 

the historic conditions. Part of the program would be to provide conditions that benefit the broad 

array of birds and aquatic resources that historically used these areas. An integral part of the 

lagoon restoration project is a survey and monitoring program that will document the effects of 

the restoration and determine if benefits are being accrued. Vieques NWR, like many other 

units of the Refuge System, is managed to restore, protect, and conserve a broad array of fish 

and wildlife resources and habitats. Migrating shorebirds are an important component and will 

be very seriously considered during the implementation of the plan and any subsequent 

changes identified through the surveys and monitoring. 

Comment: (9) Facilitate the opening of lagoons to benefit desirable species. The plan does 

not do enough soon enough. Use historic photos from the 1930s to provide background. 

Service Response: Under the preferred alternative, we would evaluate the potential for 

restoration of hydrology to lagoon systems and open two to four lagoons annually as priorities 

and budgets permit. We have the historic photography and will utilize it to assist in the 

evaluation of priorities for restoration, as well as analysis of previous conditions. Although the 

plan does not identify all of the lagoons for immediate restoration activities, we believe it does 

establish reasonable and achievable objectives and strategies for lagoon restoration. 

Comment: (7) It is recommended that the broader Habitat Management Plan also incorporate 

a Grassland Management Plan and an Invasive Species Management Plan. 

Service Response: The strategies for Alternatives B and C include grassland management 

that will be prepared as a part of the Habitat Management Plan for the refuge. We have 

amended the list of the step-down plans to clearly state that grasslands will be included in the 

Habitat Management Plan and invasive/exotic plant control and feral animal control will be 

included in the Fish and Wildlife Populations Management Plan. 

Comment: (26) When developing invasive species management programs consider cultural 

and ecological significance of coconut for benefit of community and implement a program of 

coconut planting – even though coconuts are not “native” to Vieques. 

Service Response: We recognize that coconuts have been in PR for centuries and that their use 

and consumption is a cultural issue with the community. We do not have any plans to remove 

existing stands of coconuts, and will consider issuance of special use permits for their collection. 

Comment: (7) The Puerto Rico Conservation Trust noted that the establishment of a tree 

nursery operation should be considered as a source of plant material to be used for replanting, 

restoration, and reforestation activities. 
284 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Service Response: The refuge has initiated discussions with a local NGO and the Municipality 

of Vieques regarding the potential development of a tree nursery for use by the resource 

agencies on Vieques. We believe the PRCT would be a very valuable partner in the 

development of this project to help with the restoration of all of the management areas. 

Comment: (7) Even though the Northwestern Sea Grass Beds are located within the territorial 

waters under the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, this ecosystem was going to 

be considered in the refuge’s CCP/EIS (p. 40). The CCP/EIS does not include specific actions 

to manage and protect this important marine habitat, which is currently one of the most 

threatened ecosystems in the Western Vieques region. The Northwestern Sea Grass Beds 

should receive particular attention and special consideration within the CCP/EIS. Hence, the 

CCP/EIS should also incorporate the management of the Northwestern Sea Grass Beds as part 

of the Habitat Management Plan. 

Service Response: Consideration of the Sea Grass beds within the CCP/EIS was part of the 

original planning concept; however, since this area is not within the “jurisdiction custody and control” 

of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Vieques NWR, we determined that management plans for this area 

should be cooperatively developed by all of the agencies with jurisdiction. Through the Endangered 

Species Act, the Fish and Wildlife Service has jurisdiction over listed species, including manatees 

and nesting sea turtles. We agree that the Service, the PR DNER and the Trust should work 

cooperatively to protect this area. We have included additional discussion in Chapter II of the 

CCP/EIS to clarify that this plan does not specifically address management goals for the sea grass 

beds, but the Service will continue to work cooperatively with the PR Conservation Trust and the 

Commonwealth DNER to develop management programs for this area. 

VISITOR SERVICES (PUBLIC USE) –GENERAL 

Comment: (11) One commenter noted that the CCP is a planning document and that timelines 

are given for meeting goals, but methodologies for meeting those goals are left vague. The 

commenter also recognized the need to have some flexibility, but recommended that in some 

areas like public outreach, more specific programming might be appropriate at this time. 

Service Response: It is true that some of the strategies for meeting the goals and objectives of 

this plan are not specific. The detailed strategies for these activities will be identified in the stepdown plans to be developed during the next few years. While several outreach activities are 

ongoing and have been identified in existing documents, such as the Outreach Plan for this 

CCP/EIS, the details of our long-term outreach strategies will be documented in the Public Use 

Management Plan scheduled for completion in 2008. Communication and coordination with the 

Vieques community is a high priority for the Service. 

VISITOR SERVICES (PUBLIC USE) –FACILITIES and ACCESS

Comment: ROADS and PARKING (9, 15, 16, 20, 22, 25, 28) Several comments were 

received regarding actions that should be considered with regard to the refuge roads. Some of 

these are: roads should be repaired or paved; provide speed bumps to deter speeding; use 

compacted gravel instead of paving to minimize problems with speeding; provide additional 

roads to access beaches; restrict parking to areas away from beaches; and why is the road from 

Yellow beach to Icacos and Puerto Diablo proposed for management access only. 

Service Response: Under all alternatives, the major access roads to the eastern refuge beaches 

are proposed for upgrading. The refuge is currently working with the Federal Highway 
Section B. Appendices 285

Administration to develop a plan for the upgrade of these roads. The preferred alternative 

(Alternative C) identifies additional roads to be opened to provide public access to north coast areas. 

Since the former Live Impact Area is to be managed as a wilderness with no public access 

permitted, the road immediately adjacent to this area was designated for management access only. 

Under the preferred alternative, the north coast beaches will be accessible via an alternate route. 

Comment: TRAILS (10, 15, 18) Provide trails to increase opportunities for horseback riding, 

hiking, and biking so these users do not have to compete with motor vehicles on main roads. 

Service Response: Under the preferred alternative, interpretive trails would be established at 

different points of the refuge. A portion of these trails, in addition to those opened for vehicular 

traffic, would be designated for equestrian use. Any roadways or trails may be closed 

seasonally to minimize wildlife impacts. 

Comment: VISITOR CENTER (15, 28) Recommendations were made to improve amenities for 

visitors and expand access, build a Welcome Center with nature information and activities, and 

have space available for a variety of activities and workshops. 

Service Response: Alternative C (the preferred alternative) includes the development of an 

office/visitor center, which will provide visitors with a place to contact staff and obtain 

information. Although not yet designed, we expect this facility will have limited space for 

wildlife-oriented meetings, activities, workshops and research functions. 

Comment: CAMPING (15, 25, 9, 28, 29, 30) Several commenters made recommendations 

related to the issue of camping. These included: permit camping at La Chiva, Caracas and 

Punta Arenas and at environmentally less sensitive areas; permit camping as it is a seasonal 

tradition for the Vieques Community; provide sanitary facilities and trash removal at these sites; 

provide access to additional north coast beaches, Campaña and Monte Largo; and permit 

seasonal camping on northern beach areas. 

Service Response: The planning team recognized that camping has historically been a 

recreational activity on Vieques beaches, especially during the Easter season, and developed 

the following objective to address the issue: Within two years of plan approval, determine if and 

when camping could be permitted on the refuge. To accomplish this objective, the Service will 

evaluate potential sites for overnight camping associated with environmental education activities 

and compatible recreational uses. If, after evaluation of the potential sites, a determination is 

made that camping is appropriate and compatible with the refuge mission and purposes, the 

Service would seek to develop a cooperative agreement with a commonwealth or municipal 

agency to manage a limited camping program at the designated sites. Camping associated with 

approved environmental education activities can be authorized through special use permits. 

Comment: (15, 16, 22, 28, 29) Comments recommended a variety of additional infrastructure 

development and regulation changes to facilitate public uses. These included: better roads, and 

better access to beaches; solar electricity; drinking water supply; sanitary facilities; water for 

bathrooms and showers; trash receptacles at high public use beaches; provide boating facilities 

(e.g. piers); construction of additional gazebos to accommodate increased use; placement of 

cement receptacles for hot barbecue coals at beaches; allowing outfitters to provide kiosks, etc., 

close to the beaches; maintain clean recreational areas; and expand hours of service (have the 

same hours as the National Park Service). 
286 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Service Response: The preferred alternative identifies several improvements to facilitate public 

use and access. These include improved roads, development of an office/visitor center, 

informational kiosks, limited sanitary facilities, and fishing boat launch sites. The primary purposes 

of the refuge, however, are to manage the wildlife resources and provide opportunities for wildlifedependent recreation. The mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service is not the same as that of the 

National Park Service and the refuge will not be developed to provide the amenities of high public 

use recreational sites. The preferred alternative does provide for the potential development of a 

cooperative arrangement with a Commonwealth or municipal agency to manage recreational 

activities on designated refuge beaches and identifies cooperation with the appropriate 

Commonwealth agencies to install composting toilets at high public use beaches. 

Comment: Watersports (18, 29) It was recommended that the Service increase opportunities 

for watersports and provide designated launch sites for Kayaks and other small craft. 

Service Response: The public use maps in the plan show designated fishing access sites at 

Puerto Ferro and Playa La Chiva. These sites are available for kayak launching as well. In 

addition, kayak launch access is available at Kiani Lagoon and on open beach areas. 

Comment: (15) There should be designated areas for boats to moor and limitations on boating 

in mangrove areas or near swimming areas. 

Service Response: The water areas are not under FWS jurisdiction, however, FWS will 

coordinate with DNER to address issues that affect the resources of the refuge and the visiting 

public. 

Comment: (15) One comment expressed opposition to any requirement that would limit 

kayaking to escorted tour groups. 

Service Response: None of the alternatives proposed to limit the use of kayaks to escorted tours. 

Comment: (25, 9) Remove the restrictions on hours of access to beaches on north and south 

Vieques. Provide access to additional beach locations 

Service Response: Expanded hours for wildlife-dependent activities and the opening of 

additional areas are being considered under the preferred alternative. Since cleanup is still 

being conducted by the Navy, the opening of additional access routes and sites is contingent on 

certification that the areas are clean and protective of human health and the environment. 

Comment: (7) The Puerto Rico Conservation Trust commented that the CCP/EIS provides 

details in the design and management of the main entrance for the refuge ́s eastern 

conservation lands. However, it does not address this issue for the Western Vieques 

Conservation Areas. The Trust suggests that the CCP/EIS clarify the proposed control and 

surveillance requirements for the main entrance(s) to the Western Vieques Conservation Areas. 

Service Response: The proposed management of the western refuge lands as identified in the 

CCP/EIS provides for public access to the refuge lands during daylight hours for authorized 

activities. We have not proposed general public access to (or restrictions on access to) other 

portions of the transferred lands, however, we would be pleased to work with the Trust and the 

Municipality to identify the management goals for our respective areas and develop an 

agreement that would facilitate coordination of our management activities. Any agreement 
Section B. Appendices 287

should include consideration of areas to be opened or closed, law enforcement cooperation 

(considering jurisdiction of the agencies), and maintenance of roads and facilities. 

Comment: INFORMATIONAL SIGNING and EMERGENCY CONTACTS (15, 16, 19, 20, 21) 

Comments requested that the Service provide additional information on what is permitted and 

not at entrances, beaches, hotels, in quidebooks, etc., and that we provide 24-hour emergency 

contact numbers, call boxes at beaches, post emergency numbers, and equip “rangers” with 

phones to handle distress calls. 

Service Response: The Service recognizes that security is a significant issue for visitors and 

the community of Vieques. We have developed some informational signing to identify many of 

the permitted and prohibited activities. With the implementation of the CCP, additional 

opportunities will be available to distribute information at the visitor center and informational 

kiosks. The refuge is not a highly developed park with constant coverage by lifeguards or 

rangers. As with most refuge areas, Vieques Refuge has law enforcement personnel, but they 

cannot be available at all locations at all times. The Puerto Rico Police also has jurisdiction on 

the refuge, can respond to incidents, can be contacted at all times, and have communication 

with the refuge law enforcement personnel. The Service will continue to coordinate with the 

Police to improve the security of the refuge. 

Comment: (7) The Management Plan for the Western Vieques Conservation Areas 

recommends the establishment of a library and states that  ̈the herbarium collection gathered as 

part of the floral survey done for the preparation of this plan will be displayed and available for 

studies at this library ̈ (p. 34). Therefore, The Trust recommends establishment of a 

conservation library as part of the Environmental Education Program in the CCP/EIS. 

Service Response: In the preferred alternative, the Service identified the development of a 

visitor center and office complex that would include meeting and laboratory space for 

researchers conducting biological, archaeological, or historical investigations on refuge. The 

Service would be pleased to work with the Trust and DNER to incorporate library and herbarium 

components into the planning for this facility. We anticipate initiation of planning for this facility 

during the next year. 

Comment: WIND POWER (13, 21) Consideration should be given to the development of wind 

generation facilities on the refuge. Thorough studies of bird use and potential impacts of wind 

generation on birds should be conducted. Even though Congressional approval may be 

required, wind generation on the refuge should not be ruled out and even the area designated 

for management as a wilderness should be considered since public access will not be permitted 

to that area. 

Service Response: As noted in the comments, Congressional approval or direction would be 

required before a commercial wind generation project could be implemented on the refuge. 

Although no specific studies have been made on Vieques, at other locations where wind 

generation projects have been constructed, impacts on birds and bats have been documented. 

We believe it would be inappropriate to evaluate the potential or advocate for such a project on 

a national wildlife refuge, without specific authorization and direction to do so. 
288 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

VISITOR SERVICES (PUBLIC USE) –HUNTING 

Comment: (5, 15, 25, 27, 29) Opposition to hunting and potential conflicts between hunters and 

other users were expressed. The refuge was encouraged to study the impacts of hunting on the 

refuge and its effects, not only on the target and non-target wildlife, but on the visitor experience 

of non-consumptive users. 

Service Response: The Vieques National Wildlife Refuge does not currently permit hunting. The 

preferred alternative does, however, recognize the potential for establishment of a hunting program 

if it is determined to be appropriate and compatible with other uses and it does not conflict with the 

purposes of the refuge. As one of the six priority public uses specified in the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, hunting is considered an appropriate use along with 

fishing and other wildlife-dependent public use activities. The CCP identifies a need to complete an 

evaluation of potential target species and habitats to determine if a hunting program is feasible for 

the Vieques Refuge. A “step-down” Public Use Management Plan is scheduled for development in 

2008. If huntable species populations and habitats are considered sustainable, a hunt program 

could be included as a component of this Public Use Management Plan. 

Comment: (5) The refuge should conduct a survey of consumptive versus non-consumptive 

visitors to the refuge in order to assess the economic input of each group. These data may be 

used to assess whether hunting is an economically viable option for the refuge or if it is simply 

retained as a means to appease a vocal minority. 

Service Response: The six priority wildlife-dependent recreational uses identified in the 

National Wildlife Refuge Improvement Act of 1997 are hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, 

wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation. As priority public uses of 

the Refuge System, all of these uses will receive enhanced consideration over other uses in 

planning and management of the refuge. The Service does not attempt to make an economic 

comparison of these uses to determine the relative value of one versus another. 

VISITOR SERVICES (PUBLIC USE) – FISHING 

Comment: (15, 25, 18, 23, 30) Increase opportunities for fishing, night fishing (some comments 

specified night fishing should be permitted for Vieques residents), and fishing for conch 

(carrucho). Permit the fishing of land crabs. Permit the fishing of land crabs at hours the refuge 

is currently closed. 

Service Response: In accordance with the preferred alternative in the plan, access through 

the refuge for night fishing may be permitted at designated areas during certain seasons and 

dates by Special Use Permits. Land crabbing is being considered with an experimental 

program and surveys to ensure sustainability of harvest. 

Comment: (9) The plan should use the term (pesca de jueyes) fishing of crabs instead of (caza 

de jueyes) hunting of crabs. This comment also recommended consideration of regulated 

taking of crabs that can be administered for the benefit of Vieques families. 

Service Response: The taking of land crab is included under the Commonwealth Fishing 

Regulations and should be referred to as “fishing of crabs.” The terminology has been 

corrected in the final plan. The preferred alternative provides for an experimental program on 

eastern sites and a program to monitor populations and reproduction to determine sustainability 
Section B. Appendices 289

of harvests. In addition, the Service is cooperating with a NOAA study to determine if 

contaminate levels in crabs from any sites could be a concern. 

RESOURCE PROTECTION 

Comment: (11) This report shows the need for biological inventory work on Vieques, it does 

not matter if this is done by FWS personnel or external subcontractors. It also shows how much 

work needs to be done on every front: from control of invasive species to the restoring of 

hydrology to troubled mangroves and lagoons. 

Service Response: Some inventory work has been accomplished and additional inventories 

are scheduled in accordance with preferred alternative. The details of the inventories to be 

completed and the schedules for implementation of invasive species control and lagoon 

restoration programs will be determined during the development of the step-down plans. 

Comment: (7) The PR Conservation Trust ́s properties in Vieques are being proposed as a 

biosphere reserve and will function as wildlife conservation and restoration areas. As such, no 

hunting or large-scale developments should be allowed in its core and buffer areas. The 

required extension of this buffer zone will have to be evaluated and established in coordination 

with FWS through the CCP/EIS process and with the Municipality of Vieques through a revision 

of its Land Use Plan. 

Service Response: The CCP/EIS provides conceptual plans for several potential activities on 

both the eastern and western refuge lands. While these proposals are consistent with the 

refuge goals and objectives, they will be considered in detail during the development of the 

step-down plans and will be subject to further evaluation at that time. For example, while 

hunting is considered to be a valid recreational use of refuge lands, the CCP proposal identifies 

the need for studies to determine if there is a population of huntable species that can sustain a 

quality hunting program. In addition, during the evaluation of any proposed program, 

consideration must be given to other uses on the refuge and adjacent areas. When developing 

specific plans for activities on the refuge, the Service will need to coordinate with the Trust and 

other land owners to ensure any potential conflicts with authorized uses on adjacent areas are 

addressed. 

Comment: (7) The proposed Fire Management Plan, also listed as part of the step-down plans, 

should include  ̈an inventory of operating water intakes (observed along the bunkers roads) to 

identify potential water sources, ̈ as recommended in the Management Plan for the Western 

Vieques Conservation Areas (p. 30). The Trust also requests participation in the development 

of the Fire Management Plan, given the close proximity of Trust properties to the FWS refuge 

land, and because we share public and controlled road access in the Western Vieques 

Conservation Areas considered in the CCP/EIS. 

Service Response: The Service has prepared a draft Fire Management Plan in accordance 

with our internal guidance. We agree that amendments and finalization of the plan should 

include participation by the Trust to ensure consideration of our respective needs and 

authorities and to establish a procedure for coordination of resources and personnel should the 

need arise. To our knowledge, the former hydrant system installed by the Navy is not 

operational and would require extensive construction and rehabilitation in order to function. We 

do not consider this to be a functional system that could be used in the event of a wildland fire. 

The Service periodically provides wildfire training and could offer personnel from the Trust an 

opportunity to participate. 
290 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

ADMINISTRATION – PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 

Comment: (11, 28) The comments noted that one very real problem that the Vieques Refuge 

faces, regardless of which plan is ultimately implemented, is understaffing. Reading the 

multitude of tasks (missions) that the refuge personnel are supposed to be executing 

simultaneously, it does not seem possible with current staff levels. Hire more people for all 

these services: maintenance, guards, etc. There is high unemployment in Vieques and the 

services are needed, therefore everyone would benefit from this. 

Service Response: The staffing increases proposed in the preferred alternative would help 

accomplish the tasks identified. The refuge is committed to working with the community to 

identify those areas where refuge activities can benefit not only the resources of the refuge but 

also the Vieques community. The administration of a Youth Conservation Corps program is one 

of the projects that help to accomplish this goal. 

Comment: (30) Provide facilities for grazing of horses and cattle on both east and west refuge lands. 

Service Response: Grazing on refuge lands is normally restricted to fulfill a habitat 

management need. While grazing may be utilized as a wildlife management tool, the planned 

habitat restoration efforts for the Vieques Refuge would not benefit from this activity. In keeping 

with the Service’s adaptive management practices, the refuge will continue to monitor the 

success of its programs and could consider limited grazing as management tool, if it is deemed 

appropriate in the future. 

Comment: (29) One commenter suggested that the Service provide training and encourage 

volunteers. 

Service Response: The refuge has utilized volunteers for several years and has provided a 

variety of training sessions such as; CPR, sea turtle (identification, monitoring, tagging and field 

techniques), heavy equipment operator training, UXO awareness, general refuge orientation, 

and ATV operation. To date, approximately 35 individuals have worked as volunteers on the 

refuge. We consider the volunteer program to be a very important and integral part of our 

refuge management activities and will continue to encourage and train volunteers to perform a 

variety of tasks that supplement the refuge management program. 

Comment: (7) The PR Conservation Trust provided comments and recommendations 

regarding the levels of contamination and risks associated with the western Vieques CERCLA 

sites designated as SWMU-4, SWMU-6 and AOC-J. 

Service Response: The cleanup of SWMU-4, SWMU-6 and AOC-J are being the carried out 

through the Superfund program with EPA and EQB oversight. To clarify the position of the 

Service with respect to the cleanup, the following statement was included in the Executive 

Summary for the CCP/EIS. 

“Although the short-term use and management of areas contaminated with unexploded 

ordnance would be restricted, the alternatives in this CCP/EIS were developed with the 

assumption that these lands would be cleaned of any contaminants that would pose a 

threat to either the wildlife or visitors to the refuge. Until the lands are cleaned and 

certified as suitable for a proposed use, the Service will not be able to implement 

portions of this plan. After cleanup and certification, implementation of management 

proposals will progress in accordance with agency priorities.” 
Section B. Appendices 291

It is the intent of the planning team that no activities will be permitted within contaminated sites 

until they are certified as clean, however, we believe it is appropriate to identify potential uses 

and activities for portions of the refuge that are currently closed because of contamination or 

unexploded ordnance. 

Comment: COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES (16, 28) A variety of commercial activities were 

suggested in the comments received. These included kayak rentals, boat rides, horseback 

riding, bird watching tours, bicycle, scooter, motorcycle rentals, and permitting kiosk use for 

alternative health classes. 

Service Response: Appropriate and compatible uses are covered in the plan. Non-wildlife 

oriented commercial activities that do not support the purposes of the refuge are not normally 

considered appropriate. While some of the referenced activities are wildlife oriented, any 

decision to permit a concession or commercial operation would be based on an assessment of 

need, appropriateness, and compatibility with the refuge purposes. 

Comment: SECURITY (9, 16, 20, 22) Concerns about security and incidents of robberies and 

drug drops were noted and some recommendations were provided for dealing with the 

problems. These issues are of great concern to the community because of the potential for 

impact on the tourism industry. 

Service Response: The Service recognizes that there are problems with criminal activities at 

the recreational beach use areas. The proposed alternative identifies the need for additional 

staff to conduct law enforcement and security activities. Cooperation with the local law 

enforcement agencies is also a refuge priority. Signing on the refuge and notification flyers 

have been distributed within the Vieques community. 

Comment: PARCEL “C” (25, 26, 30): Comments recommend that “Parcel C” be utilized for the 

benefit of the community; that the parcel be transferred to a “Fideicomiso Communitario” instead 

of municipal government; and that Parcel “C” be transferred without seeking exchange for land 

on Vieques. 

Service Response: FWS policy is that for any lands transferred out of the system, comparable 

lands must be received in exchange to ensure overall wildlife benefits are not reduced. 

Although “Parcel C” does not have the same restrictions as the other refuge lands regarding the 

need for Congressional approval, any transfer must still comply with Service policy. 

Comment: FORMER OBSERVATION POST (OP-1) (8, 16) Comments suggested the former 

OP be used as a research center, observatory or oceanographic institute with University 

involvement and participation or that it be used as a hostel, restaurant, and base for activities, 

such as hiking tours, bird watching, trails, and enjoying the view. 

Service Response: The former OP is located adjacent to the area that has been designated 

for management as a wilderness without public access. It is currently being used in conjunction 

with the cleanup of unexploded ordnance from the eastern part of Vieques. That cleanup will 

likely continue for several years in the future. The Service has discussed the potential for 

demolition of the structure or use as a research facility; however, since it will not be available for 

any reuse for at least several years and no thorough assessment of its condition has been 

made, we did not propose any alternative uses in this plan. If upon completion of the cleanup 

activities, it is determined that the area is safe and the building is sound and restorable, 

consideration will be given to appropriate uses that are compatible with the refuge purposes. 
292 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Appendix IX Intra-Service Section 7 

Consultation 

Originating Person: Susan Silander 

Telephone Number: 787/851-7258, ext. 238 

E-Mail: Susan_Silander@fws.gov 

Date: 

Project Name: Vieques National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan

I. Service Program: 

___ Ecological Services 

___ Federal Aid 

___ Clean Vessel Act 

___ Coastal Wetlands 

___ Endangered Species Section 6 

___ Partners for Fish and Wildlife 

___ Sport Fish Restoration 

___ Wildlife Restoration 

___ Fisheries 

 X Refuges/Wildlife 

II. State/Agency: Puerto Rico/Fish and Wildlife Service 

III. Station Name: Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

IV. Description of Proposed Action (attach additional pages as needed):

Implementation of the Comprehensive Conservation Plan for the Vieques National 

Wildlife Refuge by adopting the preferred alternative that will provide guidance, 

management direction, and operation plans for the next 15 years.
Section B. Appendices 293

V. Pertinent Species and Habitat:

A. Include species/habitat occurrence map:

 

SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT STATUS1

Antillean Manatee Endangered 

Green Sea Turtle Threatened 

Hawksbill Sea Turtle Endangered 

Leatherback Sea Turtle Endangered 

Roseate Tern Threatened 

Brown Pelican Endangered 

Yellow-Shouldered Blackbird Endangered 

Stahlia monosperma Threatened 

Chamaecrista g. var. mirabilis Endangered 

Calyptranthes thomasiana Endangered 

Goetzea elegans Endangered 

1

STATUS: E=endangered, T=threatened, PE=proposed endangered, PT=proposed threatened, CH=critical habitat, 

PCH=proposed critical habitat, C=candidate species 

VI. Location (attach map):

A. Ecoregion Number and Name: Caribbean 

B. County and State: Vieques, Puerto Rico 

C. Section, township, and range (or latitude and longitude): 

D. Distance (miles) and direction to nearest town: Seven miles to the east of the 

main island of Puerto Rico 

E. Species/habitat occurrence: 
294 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Details of species occurrence and habitat are provided in text of the comprehensive 

conservation plan. The following is a summary of occurrence: 

Antillean Manatee – Known to frequent shallow coastal waters adjacent to 

Vieques, primarily in the northwestern part of the island, but have been observed 

as far east as Puerto Ferro on the south coast. 

Green Sea Turtle – Known to nest on beaches in eastern Vieques. See attached 

map. 

Hawksbill Sea Turtle – Known to nest on beaches in both eastern and western 

Vieques. See attached map. 

Leatherback Sea Turtle – Known to nest on beaches in both eastern and western 

Vieques. See attached map. 

Roseate Tern – Reported nesting near the eastern tip of Vieques in 2001. 

Brown Pelican – Known to roost and feed in coves, inlets, and lagoons of 

Vieques. Known to nest on Cayo Conejo, a small island off the south coast of 

Vieques administered by the commonwealth. 

Yellow-shouldered Blackbird – Known from historic records but no current 

sightings documented. 

Stahlia monosperma – Known from the Laguna Kiani and Laguna Yanuel areas. 

Calyptranthes thomasiana – Known from the summit of Monte Pirata in Vieques. 

Chamaecrista glandulosa var. mirabilis – Reported from the Playa Caracas area 

in eastern Vieques but not relocated in recent years. 

Goetzea elegans – Known from western Vieques in the lower portions of Monte 

Pirata. 
Section B. Appendices 295

VII. Determination of Effects: 

A. Explanation of effects of the action on species and critical habitats in item 

V. B (attach additional pages as needed). 

SPECIES/ 

CRITICAL HABITAT 

IMPACTS TO SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT 

Antillean Manatee Disturbance from activities by staff and visitors associated with 

fishing facilities, such as boat ramps (i.e., increase in boats and 

potential impacts to seagrass beds). 

Green Sea Turtle Potential adverse impacts include disturbance by staff and 

visitors during nesting season; disturbance to nests/nesting 

habitat (e.g., vegetation removal) during management of lagoon 

openings; and disturbance to habitat during development of 

beach recreational facilities (e.g., gazebos, boat ramps, lighting, 

and impacts to seagrass beds). Beneficial effects include 

monitoring programs, planting of coastal vegetation, feral animal 

control, and education/outreach activities. 

Hawksbill Sea Turtle Disturbance by staff and visitors during nesting season, 

disturbance to nests/nesting habitat during management of 

lagoon openings, disturbance to habitat (vegetation removal, 

lighting) during development of beach recreational facilities such 

as gazebos. Beneficial effects include monitoring programs, 

planting of coastal vegetation, feral animal control, and 

education/outreach activities. 

Leatherback Sea Turtle Disturbance by staff and visitors during nesting season, 

disturbance to nests/nesting habitat during management of 

lagoon openings, disturbance of habitat (vegetation removal, 

lighting) during development of beach recreational facilities such 

as gazebos. Beneficial effects include monitoring programs, 

planting of coastal vegetation, feral animal control, and 

education/outreach activities. 

Roseate Tern Disturbance by staff during nesting season. 

Brown Pelican Disturbance by staff and visitors in foraging and roosting habitat. 

Yellow-Shouldered Blackbird No adverse effects to the species or their potential habitat 

anticipated. 

Stahlia monosperma No adverse effects anticipated. Trails, roads, and structures will 

be located so as to avoid impacts to the species. Beneficial 

effects include inventories to locate additional populations and the 

propagation and the establishment or enhancement of 

populations. 
296 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

SPECIES/ 

CRITICAL HABITAT 

IMPACTS TO SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT 

Chamaecrista g. var. 

glandulosa 

No adverse effects anticipated. Trails, roads, and structures will 

be located so as to avoid impacts to the species. Beneficial 

effects include inventories to locate additional populations and the 

propagation and the establishment or enhancement of 

populations. 

Calyptranthes thomasiana No adverse effects anticipated. Trails, roads, and structures will 

be located so as to avoid impacts to the species. Beneficial 

effects include inventories to locate additional populations and the 

propagation and establishment or enhancement of populations. 

Goetzea elegans No adverse effects anticipated. Trails, roads, and structures will 

be located so as to avoid impacts to the species. Beneficial 

effects include inventories to locate additional populations and the 

propagation and establishment or enhancement of populations. 
Section B. Appendices 297

 B. Explanation of actions to be implemented to reduce adverse effects. 

SPECIES/ 

CRITICAL HABITAT 

ACTIONS TO MITIGATE/MINIMIZE IMPACTS 

Antillean Manatee Because the construction of boat ramps requires a permit from 

the Corps of Engineers, impacts from this type of activity will 

be evaluated upon application for the permit. Impacts to 

seagrass beds will be avoided. 

Green Sea Turtle Restrict access to nesting area areas by visitors to daylight 

hours, restrict activities in nesting habitat (e.g., beach 

umbrellas), and construct recreational facilities outside of 

nesting habitat. Accesses to beaches from roads through 

vegetation will be limited and those accesses eliminated will 

be revegetated. Lighting on those facilities that require 

nighttime lights (e.g., security lights) will be designed in such 

as way as to avoid lighting being visible from the beach. 

Impacts from management of lagoon openings will be avoided 

by monitoring nesting and timing of such activities. Horseback 

riding will not be permitted on beaches. 

Hawksbill Sea Turtle Restrict access to nesting areas by visitors to daylight hours, 

restrict activities in nesting habitat (e.g., beach umbrellas), and 

construct recreational facilities outside of nesting habitat. 

Accesses to beaches from roads through vegetation will be 

limited and those accesses eliminated will be revegetated. 

Lighting on those facilities that require nighttime lights (e.g., 

security lights) will be designed in such a way as to avoid 

lighting being visible from the beach. Impacts from 

management of lagoon openings will be avoided by monitoring 

nesting and timing of such activities. Horseback riding will not 

be permitted on beaches. 

Leatherback Sea Turtle Restrict access to nesting area areas by visitors to daylight 

hours, restrict activities in nesting habitat (e.g., beach 

umbrellas), and construct recreational facilities outside of 

nesting habitat. Accesses to beaches from roads through 

vegetation will be limited and those accesses eliminated will 

be revegetated. Lighting on those facilities that require 

nighttime lights (e.g., security lights) will be designed in such a 

way as to avoid lighting being visible from the beach. Impacts 

from management of lagoon openings will be avoided by 

monitoring nesting and timing of such activities. Horseback 

riding will not be permitted on beaches. 

Roseate Tern Because the location of the nesting area is to the east of the 

“Live Impact Area,” access by the public will be restricted. 

Staff will avoid nesting areas during the nesting season. 
298 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

SPECIES/ 

CRITICAL HABITAT 

ACTIONS TO MITIGATE/MINIMIZE IMPACTS 

Brown Pelican Educational/outreach panels or material will be prepared at 

areas utilized for fishing, indicating measure designed to 

protect the pelican (e.g., no discarding of fish lines or hooks). 

Yellow-Shouldered 

Blackbird 

N/A 

Stahlia monosperma N/A 

Chamaecrista g. var. 

glandulosa 

N/A 

Calyptranthes thomasiana N/A 

Goetzea elegans N/A 

VIII. Effect Determination and Response Requested:

SPECIES/ 

CRITICAL HABITAT 

DETERMINATION1 RESPONSE1

NE NA AA 

Antillean Manatee X 

Green Sea Turtle X 

Hawksbill Sea Turtle X 

Leatherback Sea Turtle X 

Roseate Tern X 

Brown Pelican X 

Yellow-Shouldered Blackbird X 

Stahlia monosperma X 

Chamaecrista g. var. glandulosa X 

Calyptranthes thomasiana X 

Goetzea elegans X 

 1DETERMINATION/RESPONSE REQUESTED: 

NE = no effect. This determination is appropriate when the proposed action will not impact directly, 

indirectly, or cumulatively, either positively or negatively, any listed, proposed, candidate species or 
Section B. Appendices 299

designated/proposed critical habitat. Response Requested is optional but a Concurrence is recommended 

for a complete Administrative Record. 

NA = not likely to adversely affect. This determination is appropriate when the proposed action is not likely 

to adversely impact any listed, proposed, candidate species or designated/proposed critical habitat or there 

may be beneficial effects to these resources. Response Requested is a Concurrence. 

AA = likely to adversely affect. This determination is appropriate when the proposed action is likely to 

adversely impact any listed, proposed, candidate species or designated/proposed critical habitat. Response 

Requested for listed species is Formal Consultation. Response Requested for proposed or candidate 

species is Conference. 

I 
300 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Appendix X. Compatibility Determinations 

Refuge Name: Vieques National Wildlife Refuge, Vieques, Puerto Rico 

Date Established: May 1, 2001 

Establishing and Acquisition Authorities: The refuge was established when approximately 

3,100 acres were transferred by the Department of the Navy to the Department of the Interior, 

Fish and Wildlife Service under Section 1508, Title XV, Public Law 106-398, signed by 

President Clinton on October 30, 2000. A significant portion of land, approximately 14,573 

acres, was added on April 29, 2003, under Section 1049, Title XV, Public Law 107-107, signed 

by President George W. Bush on October 30, 2002. 

Other Applicable Laws, Regulations and Policies: 

1. National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended 

[16 U.S.C.668dd-668ee]. 

2. Migratory Bird Conservation Act, as amended [16 U.S.C. 715-715d, 715e, 715f-715r]. 

3. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended [16 U.S.C. 1531-1544] 

4. Public Law 106-398 of October 30, 2000. 

5. Public Law 107-107 of October 30, 2002. 

6. Memorandum of Agreement between the Department of the Navy and the Department of 

the Interior Concerning the Transfer of Lands of Vieques, signed on April 30, 2003. 

7. Letter from Honorable Annabelle Rodriguez, Secretary of Justice, Commonwealth of Puerto 

Rico to Honorable Cesar Miranda, Secretary of the Governor, dated March 24, 2004, 

regarding the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico on the maritime 

terrestrial zone on Vieques Island. 

8. Memorandum of Understanding between the Fish and Wildlife Service and the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico for Law Enforcement Assistance dated October 29, 2004. 

Purpose of the Refuge: Section 1508 (d) of Public Law 106-398 dated October 30, 2000, 

established that the lands transferred to the Department of the Interior “shall be managed to 

protect and preserve the natural resources of the lands in perpetuity.” 

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission: The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System is “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.” (National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended 

[16 U.S.C. 668DD-668ee]) 

Compatibility determinations for each description listed were considered separately. Although 

for brevity, the preceding sections from “Refuge Name” through “National Wildlife Refuge 

System Mission” are only written once within the Compatibility Determinations’ Section, they are 

part of each descriptive use/uses and become part of that compatibility determination if 

considered outside of the comprehensive conservation plan. 
Section B. Appendices 301

Description of Use: Wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education 

and interpretation 

Currently, a large portion of the refuge that will be used for these activities is closed to 

public access due to the dangers from remaining military operations and unexploded 

ordnance. However, as these areas are cleaned of contaminants, cleared of unexploded 

ordnance, and made safe for public use they will become accessible and available for these 

types of use. Overall, the refuge is composed of natural habitats with a number of roads 

and trails crisscrossing large areas of undeveloped land on the island of Vieques. Within its 

jurisdiction, the refuge also contains a number of significant cultural, historical, and 

archaeological sites. In addition, the refuge is surrounded by beaches, has access to 

several bays, and manages approximately 90 percent of the mangrove areas and access to 

the majority of the lagoons on the island. Of the three bioluminescent bays on the island, 

two are completely surrounded by refuge lands, while the third is bordered by the refuge and 

the designated commonwealth conservation area. 

 

Designated sites, kiosks, travel routes, trails, other facilities, and educational/interpretative signs in 

these areas are being addressed for these activities through the development of the 

comprehensive conservation plan. Through the planning process, the Service recognizes these 

needs and recommends solutions to improve public access and opportunities for nature-based 

non-consumptive activities. In addition, through the comprehensive conservation plan and interim 

management plans, the Service is addressing the need to develop separate compatibility 

determinations for guided/interpretative commercial outfitters, who wish to conduct nature-based 

tours (e.g., wildlife and plant) through hiking, photo safaris, kayaking, canoeing, bicycling, or 

horseback. Different criteria, conditions, and restrictions will have to be created for these activities 

depending on the mode of access and their potential adverse impact on the natural resources. 

The proposed uses will allow the general public to use the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge for 

non-consumptive activities, such as wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and 

environmental education and interpretation. These activities are priority public uses on national 

wildlife refuges as identified in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. 

Access to both the eastern and western tracts of the refuge would be allowed throughout the 

year during daylight hours when the refuge is open to the public, or after dark on a case-by-case 

basis, as authorized by the refuge manager. 

The general public already employs various means (i.e., hiking, biking, horseback riding, 

kayaking, canoeing, and driving mopeds or cars) to access the refuge and to engage in 

wildlife dependent non-consumptive activities. Nature photography and wildlife observation, 

bird watching in particular, are already popular activities on the island of Vieques. 

Environmental education and interpretation activities continue to be developed by Service 

staff in an effort to increase the public's knowledge of plants, wildlife, ecology, national 

wildlife refuges, and land management. Through the implementation of the comprehensive 

conservation plan, the refuge will continue to enact programs for education and 

interpretation activities. Informational kiosks, interpretive panels, and various interpretive 

trails for self-guided walks, and structured outreach/education activities will be developed to 

facilitate nature photography and wildlife and plant observation. 

The refuge staff anticipates that an increase in non-consumptive wildlife-dependent uses will 

occur over the next few years as the refuge improves facilities, and especially as the public and 

conservation groups become more aware of the excellent nature-related opportunities on the 

refuge. Access through, or entry to, all or portions of areas may be temporarily, or in specific 
302 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

cases, permanently suspended by posting upon occasions of unusual or critical conditions 

affecting land, water, vegetation, wildlife populations, or public safety. 

Availability of Resources: Portions of the refuge have been opened to the public since they 

were acquired. Thus, roads, access trails, parking lots, signs, and other infrastructure, as well 

as staff to enforce regulations and maintain these facilities, have been provided by the Service. 

The refuge is also working to develop and manage a volunteer program to successfully 

integrate the community and complement the implementation of environmental education, visitor 

use, and interpretation programs.

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: Access to and use of the refuge for non-commercial and 

non-consumptive activities, such as wildlife observation, nature photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation, poses minimal impacts to wildlife and plant species. Access for 

these types of activities is typically by individuals or small groups. Within the non-restricted 

areas of the refuge, depending on the mode of access and its potentially adverse impact on the 

natural resources, the refuge will post and restrict the type of use within the designated trails 

and areas. Within the designated routes of travel and in established parking lot areas there are 

barriers to prevent vehicles from driving onto the foot trails, and mangrove, beach, or 

environmentally sensitive areas. Although these prohibitions are currently posted on various 

points inside the refuge, the Service will need to identify and post more signs in certain 

environmentally sensitive areas to ensure compliance. 

Throughout the areas opened to the public, and eventually the available cleared restricted areas 

of the refuge, there are a number of potential sites and trails for these activities to occur. 

However, they will only occupy small sections of land in strategically and biologically determined 

areas, thus leaving most of the refuge to be managed to protect and conserve the natural 

resources of these lands. Based on biological data, conservation management plans, 

unreasonable harassment of wildlife, or destruction of the habitat, the refuge manager may 

restrict the use or close some beaches and other areas to public use. 

Wildlife Observation and Photography: These activities could result in some disturbance to 

wildlife, especially if visitors venture too close to tern nests, colonial nesting bird rookeries, or 

resting waterfowl and/or shorebirds during migration. The refuge will prohibit visitors from 

traveling in areas around nests, rookeries, and managed wetlands. The staff will locate the foot 

trails and photography blinds opened to pedestrian use to minimize disturbance that could occur 

in these sensitive areas. If the staff identifies unacceptable levels of disturbance at any time, 

the sites will be closed to public entry. Some minimal trampling of vegetation also may occur. 

Construction of foot trails and photography blinds and upgrading refuge roads will alter small 

portions of the natural environment. Proper planning prior to construction and sediment 

retention and grade stabilization features will reduce negative impacts to wetlands, threatened 

and endangered species, and species of special concern. Impacts, such as trampling 

vegetation and wildlife disturbance do occur, but is presently not significant. Visitors could 

cause other potential negative impacts, such as violating refuge regulations, littering, or illegally 

taking plants or wildlife. These potential violations will be addressed through a combination of 

education, outreach, and law enforcement activities. Use of refuge roads, trails, and facilities by 

the public does incur added maintenance costs. 

Environmental Education and Interpretation: Construction of facilities, such as kiosks, 

observations posts/towers, blinds, and interpretive trails with appropriate signage, will alter small 

portions of the natural environment on the refuge. Proper planning and placement of facilities 
Section B. Appendices 303

will ensure that they do not negatively impact wetlands, threatened or endangered species, or 

species of special concern. The refuge staff will obtain proper permits through the 

commonwealth and federal regulatory agencies, prior to construction, to ensure resource 

protection. The use of on-site, hands-on, action-oriented activities to accomplish environmental 

education and interpretive tours may impose a low-level impact on the sites used for these 

activities. These low-level impacts may include trampling of vegetation and temporary 

disturbance to wildlife species in the immediate area. Educational activities held off-refuge will 

not create any biological impacts on the resource. 

Public Review and Comment: This compatibility determination was part of the Draft 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement for Vieques National 

Wildlife Refuge, which was announced in the Federal Register on February 28, 2007 (72 FR 

9018) and made available for public comment for 60 days until April 30, 2007. Methods used to 

solicit public review and comment included posted notices at refuge headquarters and area 

locations; copies of the draft comprehensive conservation plan was distributed to adjacent 

landowners, the public, and local, state, and federal agencies; public meetings; and news 

releases to area newspapers. Appendix VIII summarizes the public comments. 

Determination (check one below): 

____Use is Not Compatible 

 X Use is Compatible with Following Stipulations 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 1) Harassment of wildlife and excessive 

damage to vegetation are prohibited; 2) Horseback riding, bicycling, and riding mopeds or 

motorcycles on the beaches and other environmentally sensitive areas are prohibited; 3) Access 

by motorized vehicles is only authorized on public roads and parking lots; 4) No bicycles, 

horses, or motorized vehicles may be left overnight on the refuge; 5) Any overnight use requires 

a special use permit issued by the refuge; 6) Any overnight use of any mode of transportation is 

allowed only on designated main roads, parking lots, and tie-down posts of the western tract of 

the refuge, and only by those individuals who will be conducting night fishing activities; 7) 

Rented bikes, horses, mopeds, and motorcycles brought by visitors onto the refuge for their use 

are permitted; 8) Providing outfitting or commercial services on the refuge requires a special use 

permit issued by the refuge; 9) All Puerto Rico and federal traffic laws must be obeyed; 10) 

Zoning of visitor activities by time and space, clustering public use facilities, proper monitoring, 

educating visitors, and enforcement will ensure compatibility with the purposes of the refuge and 

mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System; 11) Prior to construction, the refuge staff will 

obtain permits from local, state, and federal regulatory agencies to reduce the possibility of 

negatively impacting wetlands, cultural resources, or protected species; 12) Public use will be 

monitored to document any negative impacts, and if any become noticeable, the staff will take 

corrective action to reduce or eliminate the effects on wildlife; and 13) Major portions of the 

refuge will remain undeveloped without public interpretive facilities or access. 

Justification: The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 identified wildlife 

observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation as activities 

that the Service should provide and expand on refuges. It is through permitted, compatible 

public uses, such as these, that the public becomes aware of and provides support for national 

wildlife refuges. Educating and informing the public through structured environmental education 

courses; interpretive materials; and guided tours about migratory birds, endangered species, 
304 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

wildlife management, and ecosystems, will lead to improved support of the Service’s mission to 

protect natural resources. 

Mandatory 15-Year Re-evaluation Date: ____08/01/2022___ 

Description of Use: Bicycling, Horseback Riding, Hiking, Jogging, and Moped/Motorcycle 

Riding 

These uses will allow the general public access onto the refuge by hiking, walking, and jogging; 

bicycle; horseback; moped; and motorcycle for wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and 

recreation. Access to both the eastern and western tracts of the refuge will be allowed anytime 

of the year during daylight hours when the refuge is open to the public, or after dark, on a caseby-case basis, as authorized by the refuge manager. Activities on foot, bicycling, horseback 

riding, and the use of mopeds/motorcycles will be allowed on specified and designated roads, 

footpaths, and trails. Some of these designated travel routes will be accessible for all of these 

modes of transportation, while others will be posted as being specific to a certain activity (e.g., a 

hiking trail). Access through or entry on all or portions of individual areas may be temporarily 

suspended, by posting, upon occasions of unusual or critical conditions affecting land, water, 

vegetation, wildlife and plant populations, or public safety. Access for the general public onto 

the beaches and other potentially sensitive environmental areas is only allowed by foot travel. 

Access to the refuge through designated travel routes provides the general public the 

opportunity to enjoy scenic views, diverse wildlife, and an array of plants and various habitats. 

This, in turn, allows for wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education 

and interpretation opportunities not usually available on adjacent municipal and private lands. 

Availability of Resources: Portions of the refuge have been opened to the public since they 

were acquired. Thus, roads, access trails, parking lots, signs, and other infrastructure, as well 

as staff to enforce regulations and maintain these facilities, have been provided by the Service. 

Designated travel routes, trails, other facilities, and educational/interpretive signs in these areas 

are being addressed in the development of the comprehensive conservation plan. Through the 

comprehensive conservation planning process, the Service recognizes these needs and 

recommends solutions to improve public access opportunities. In addition, through this plan, 

the Service is addressing the need to develop a separate compatibility determination that may 

allow bicycle and horse rentals on the refuge and/or access for guided/interpretive commercial 

outfitters who wish to use this resource. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: Access and use of the refuge for non-commercial use of 

mopeds/motorcycles, activities on foot, bicycling, and horseback riding on designated roads 

pose minimal impacts to plant and wildlife species on the refuge. Access for these types of 

activities is typically by individuals or small groups. Within the non-restricted areas of the 

refuge, the designated routes of travel end in established parking lot areas, which, in turn, have 

strategically placed barriers that prevent vehicles from being driven onto the foot trails, 

mangrove, or beach areas. Although these prohibitions are currently posted at various points 

inside the refuge, the refuge will need to identify and post more signs in certain environmentally 

sensitive areas to ensure compliance. Based on biological data, conservation management 

plans, unreasonable harassment of wildlife, or destruction of the habitat, the refuge manager 

may restrict the use or close some beaches and other areas to public use if it is determined that 

the use could have negative impacts on the resources, bird, and/or sea turtle nesting activities. 
Section B. Appendices 305

Bicycling: Damage to habitat by riding a bicycle on the designated main roads is minimal. 

Damage to the vegetation by individuals riding through designated, interpretive, and posted bike 

trails is minimal and temporary. Some erosion and widening might be expected on either side of 

the trails as part of the bike traffic. Regular preventive and corrective maintenance should be able 

to address this problem. There is some temporary disturbance to wildlife due to human activity on 

the land. The Service will invest in placing some bike security lock racks in certain designated 

areas, such as parking lots or sections of the track where the biking trails end and the hiking trails 

or broad walks begin. These security lock racks will assist in providing the visitors with added 

security from theft and it will keep the bicycles from being locked to other Service structures or to 

trees and from being dragged across possible bird/sea turtle nesting beaches. 

Most of the recreational bicycling use is from personally owned bikes or from rentals. The 

majority of riders tend to be visitors from the United States mainland or from Europe, hence 

according to the refuge visitation statistics, bike use should increase on the refuge between the 

months of November and April. Once interpretive signs and bike trails have been established 

on the refuge to facilitate wildlife/plant observations, photography, environmental education, 

recreation and exercise, it is expected that there will be an increase in their use by visitors from 

the main island of Puerto Rico between the months of May and July. 

Horseback riding: Unlike other areas in Puerto Rico and the United States mainland, 

horseback riding is still one of the most frequently used modes of transportation on the island of 

Vieques. The majority of horseback riders using the refuge are local community members, 

many of whom have no other form of transportation to access opportunities to observe and 

enjoy wildlife-dependent activities. Damage to habitat by riding a horse on the designated main 

roads is minimal. Damage to the vegetation by individuals riding through designated 

interpretive and posted horse trails is minimal and temporary. Some erosion and widening 

might be expected on either side of the trails as part of the horse traffic. Regular preventive and 

corrective maintenance should be able to address this problem. Unlike bike riding, horses can 

easily access a number of areas where they would not get bogged down. Many of these areas 

are considered environmentally sensitive and horseback riding could create great damage to 

those habitats, hence it is imperative that the public be educated and encouraged to only use 

the designated roads, trails, and horse resting locations. In particular, horseback riding is off 

limits on beaches, and mangrove and riparian areas. Any riders who are traveling off these 

designated routes or are otherwise engaged in prohibited activities will be subject to potential 

violations and intervention from agency representatives (Fish and Wildlife Service, Department 

of Natural and Environmental Resources, and Puerto Rico police). 

There is some temporary disturbance to wildlife due to human activity on the land. The Service 

will invest in placing some tie-down posts in certain designated areas, adjacent to parking lots or 

sections of the track where the horse riding trails end and the hiking trails or broad walks begin. 

These tie-down posts will assist in providing visitors with a safe place, away from traffic, to rest 

the horses while the visitors engage in other authorized activities. These posts will also keep 

visitors from securing their horses to trees and to other structures on the refuge. These tiedown sites should be in shaded and grassy areas that keep the horse dung from affecting other 

visitors to the refuge. In addition, the dung collected from these sites can be used as fertilizer 

for reforestation projects. The latter use will be discontinued if it is determined that doing so 

aids in propagating the seeds of introduced or exotic plants. Only horses that are controlled by 

a human rider or tied to a designated post are allowed to be inside the refuge, all loose and feral 

horses will be removed from Fish and Wildlife Service managed lands in accordance with 

Service regulations. Access to and from the refuge will only be allowed through the main 
306 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

entrances. Cattle guards will be placed on the roadway of these entrances to keep feral 

horses/cattle out, while a small side gate will be used by horseback riders. 

Hiking, walking and jogging: Damage to habitat by hiking, walking, or jogging on the 

designated main roads is minimal. Damage to vegetation by individuals hiking, walking, or 

jogging through designated, interpretive, and posted hiking trails is minimal and temporary. 

Some erosion and widening might be expected on either side of the trails as part of foot traffic in 

the area. Regular preventive and corrective maintenance should be able to address this 

problem. There is some temporary disturbance to wildlife due to human activity on the land. 

Once interpretive signs, hiking trails, and additional boardwalks have been established on the 

refuge to facilitate wildlife/plant observations, photography, environmental education, recreation 

and exercise, it is expected that there will be an increase in their use by local community 

visitors, as well as visitors from other areas. The most notable increase will be from November 

to April and also from May to July. 

Moped and motorcycle riding: Mopeds used on the refuge are either privately owned or 

rented in the local community, while motorcycles are mostly privately owned. Both of these 

forms of transportation will have minimal damage to the habitat while traveling on the 

designated main roads. Traveling on a moped or a motorcycle is only permitted on the 

designated main roads and parking lots and is prohibited off road, on any other trails designated 

for other uses, and on the beaches or other environmentally sensitive areas. Just as with 

automobile traffic on the refuge, these motorized vehicles are also subject to all federal and 

commonwealth traffic laws and regulations. Moped and motorcycle riding is a mode of 

transportation to access the refuge and facilitates wildlife/plant observations, photography, 

environmental education, and recreation activities. With the increased availability of mopeds as 

an alternative to rental automobiles, it is expected that there will be an increase in their use by 

visitors from the main island of Puerto Rico, as well as visitors from other areas. The most 

notable increase will be from November to April and also from May to July. 

Public Review and Comment: This compatibility determination was part of the Draft 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement for Vieques National 

Wildlife Refuge, which was announced in the Federal Register on February 28, 2007 (72 FR 

9018) and made available for public comment for 60 days until April 30, 2007. Methods used to 

solicit public review and comment included posted notices at refuge headquarters and area 

locations; copies of the draft comprehensive conservation plan was distributed to adjacent 

landowners, the public, and local, state, and federal agencies; public meetings; and news 

releases to area newspapers. Appendix VIII summarizes the public comments. 

Determination (check one below): 

___ Use is Not Compatible 

 X Use is Compatible with Following Stipulations 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 1) Harassment of wildlife or excessive 

damage to vegetation is prohibited; 2) Horseback riding, bicycling, and riding mopeds or 

motorcycles on the beaches and other environmentally sensitive areas are prohibited; 3) Access 

by motorized vehicles is only authorized on public roads and parking lots; 4) No bicycles, 

horses, or motorized vehicles may be left overnight on the refuge; 5) Any overnight use of any 

of these modes of transportation is allowed on the designated main roads, parking lots, and tiedown posts of the western tract of the refuge, but only for those individuals who will be 
Section B. Appendices 307

conducting night fishing activities; 6) Rented bikes, horses, mopeds, and motorcycles brought 

by visitors onto the refuge for their use are permitted; 7) All Puerto Rico and federal traffic laws 

must be obeyed. 

Providing outfitting or commercial services on the refuge requires a special use permit to be 

issued by the refuge manager, as does any activities that require visitors to remain on the 

refuge overnight. 

Justification: These uses have been determined compatible because they are considered 

compatible and acceptable alternate modes of transportation. They provide the means for the 

general public to access and travel on designated routes of the refuge for wildlife/plant 

observation, photography, environmental education, fishing, exercise, and recreation. It is 

believed that if properly managed these activities will not interfere with the Service's work to 

protect and conserve natural resources. The level of use for these activities on the refuge is 

moderate to high, depending on the season. The associated disturbance to wildlife is temporary 

and minor. Although recreational horseback riding, bicycling, and moped or motorcycle riding 

are not priority uses on the refuge, under the conditions described above they are not 

detrimental activities. For a number of visitors, access to partake in fishing, wildlife observation, 

wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation, which are priority public 

uses, is only possible if they use one of the above-listed modes of transportation. Designated 

trails, boardwalks, or other sites set aside for horseback riders also provide the Service with 

specific areas and the opportunity to place educational/interpretive signs highlighting natural 

resources and their conservation needs. These uses also help fulfill the mission of the National 

Wildlife Refuge System. 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: ____08/01/2017___ 

Description of Use: Kayaking and canoeing 

Kayaking and canoeing allows the general public access through and around the refuge’s 

lagoons, mangrove areas, bays, and beaches for wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and 

recreation. Access to both the eastern and western tracts of Vieques Refuge will be allowed 

anytime of the year during daylight hours when the refuge is open to the public, or after dark, on 

a case-by-case basis, as authorized by the refuge manager. Kayaks and canoes used by the 

general public for these recreational purposes can be transported through the refuge’s 

designated travel routes on motorized vehicles that do not exceed the weight and size limits for 

the roads. Access through or entry on all or portions of individual areas may be temporarily 

suspended, by posting, upon occasions of unusual or critical conditions affecting land, water, 

vegetation, wildlife/plant populations, or public safety. 

Currently, a large portion of the refuge that will be used for these activities is closed to public 

access due to the dangers from remaining military operations and unexploded ordnance. 

However, as these areas are cleaned of contaminants, cleared of unexploded ordnance, and 

made safe for public use, they will become accessible and available for these types of use. 

Overall, the refuge is surrounded by beaches, has access to several bays, and manages 

approximately 90 percent of the mangrove areas and the majority of the lagoons on the island. 

Of the three bioluminescent bays on the island, two are completely surrounded by refuge lands, 

while the third is bordered by the refuge and the designated commonwealth conservation area. 
308 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Availability of Resources: Portions of the refuge have been opened to the public since they 

were acquired. Thus, roads, access trails, parking lots, signs, and other infrastructure, as well 

as staff to enforce regulations and maintain these facilities have been provided by the Service. 

Designated launch and recovery sites for kayaks and canoes, and other facilities, as well as 

educational/interpretive signs in these areas, are being addressed in the comprehensive 

conservation plan. Through the comprehensive conservation planning process, the Service 

recognizes these needs and recommends solutions to improve public access opportunities. In 

addition, through the comprehensive conservation plan, the Service is addressing the need to 

develop a separate compatibility determination that will allow kayak and canoe rentals on the 

refuge, as well as access for guided/interpretive commercial tour companies that wish to use the 

refuge. Such activities will be closely coordinated with the Puerto Rico Department of 

Environmental and Natural Resources. 

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: Access to the refuge for the purpose of launching noncommercial kayaks and canoes on designated roads of travel pose minimal impacts to plant and 

wildlife species. Access for kayaking and canoeing is typically by individuals or small groups. 

On average they transport one to four kayaks or one to two canoes on top of their motorized 

vehicles or tow them on small trailers. Within the non-restricted areas of the refuge, the 

designated routes of travel end in established parking lot areas, which, in turn, have strategically 

placed barriers that prevent vehicles from driving onto the foot trails, and mangrove or beach 

areas. Based on biological data, conservation management plans, unreasonable harassment of 

wildlife, or destruction of the habitat, the manager may restrict the use or close some beaches 

and other areas from this and other public use, if it is determined that they could have negative 

impacts on the resources, and bird and/or sea turtle nesting activities. 

Damage to habitat by walking or dragging a kayak/canoe to and from the launch sites is minimal 

and temporary. Damage to mangrove and other wetland vegetation by individuals paddling 

through the areas is minimal and temporary. There is some temporary disturbance to wildlife 

due to human activity on the land and on the water (e.g., flushing wildlife from cover) however, 

the public access for kayaking and canoeing should not create unreasonable impacts. 

Public Review and Comment: This compatibility determination was part of the Draft 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement for Vieques National 

Wildlife Refuge, which was announced in the Federal Register on February 28, 2007 (72 FR 

9018) and made available for public comment for 60 days until April 30, 2007. Methods used to 

solicit public review and comment included posted notices at refuge headquarters and area 

locations; copies of the draft comprehensive conservation plan was distributed to adjacent 

landowners, the public, and local, state, and federal agencies; public meetings; and news 

releases to area newspapers. Appendix VIII summarizes the public comments. 

Determination (check one below): 

____ Use is Not Compatible 

 X Use is Compatible with Following Stipulations 

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: 1) Harassment of wildlife and excessive 

damage to vegetation is prohibited; 2) Driving, camping, and building fires on the beaches is 

prohibited; 3) Access by motorized vehicles is only authorized on public roads and parking lots; 
Section B. Appendices 309

4) No kayaks, canoes, or related equipment may be left overnight on the refuge; 5) Any 

overnight use requires a special use permit issued by the refuge; 6) Rented or owned 

kayaks/canoes brought by the visitors onto the refuge for their use is permitted; 7) Providing 

outfitting or commercial services on the refuge requires a special use permit issued by the 

refuge; 8) Activities/use of waterways and beaches will be conducted in accordance with the 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources. 

Justification: This use has been determined compatible because allowing the general public 

access through the Vieques Refuge to use kayaks and canoes for wildlife observation, wildlife 

photography, and recreation will not interfere with the Service's work to protect and conserve 

natural resources. The level of use for these activities is moderate on the refuge. The 

associated disturbance to wildlife is temporary and minor. Although recreational kayaking and 

canoeing are not priority public uses, under the conditions described above, they are not 

detrimental activities. Access for wildlife observation and photography, which are priority uses, 

allows visitors to enjoy the outdoors and wild lands. Designated launch and recovery sites also 

provide the Service with specific areas in which to place educational/interpretive signs, 

highlighting natural resources and their conservation needs. These uses also help fulfill the 

mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

Mandatory 10-Year Re-evaluation Date: ____08/01/2017___ 
310 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Approval of Compatibility Determination 

The signature of approval is for all compatibility determinations considered within the Vieques 

National Wildlife Refuge comprehensive conservation plan. If one of the described uses is 

considered for compatibility outside of the plan, the approval signatures become part of that 

determination. 
Section B. Appendices 311
312 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

APPENDIX XI. Management Methods and 

Priorities 

PARTNERS IN FLIGHT CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 

Species of Conservation Importance in 

Bird Conservation Region 69—Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands

Although recommendations and priorities regarding West Indian avifauna are not explicitly 

addressed in the body of this plan, the inclusion of material pertaining to the Commonwealth of 

Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands was felt to be warranted for several reasons: their 

participation in U.S. Joint Ventures; their consideration in North American Wetland Conservation 

Act project funding; their inclusion as domestic partners under the Neotropical Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act; and the mandate for development of proposals under state wildlife grants to 

consider Partners in Flight (and other continental bird) planning guidance. Future planning 

efforts will benefit from the participation and insights of all West Indian partners, ultimately 

leading to an avifaunal analysis that considers the entire West Indies. Such an analysis will 

take considerable coordination and time, and is beyond the scope of the present plan. 

Nonetheless, we anticipate that the consideration given here to avifauna of Puerto Rico and the 

U.S. Virgin Islands might serve as a prelude for fully incorporating the highly vulnerable endemic 

avifauna of other West Indian islands into future plan versions. 

Here, we merely note which of the 448 species originally considered in this plan and identified in 

the Partners in Flight Watch List also occur in Puerto Rico and the U.S Virgin Islands. How 

these species become incorporated into species priority lists for conservation attention mixed in 

with West Indian endemic species is still to be determined. Additionally, we indicate which 

endemic species found on these islands would warrant identification as Watch List or 

Stewardship species if the procedures and criteria used in this plan were to be extended to the 

West Indies. Note that many of the birds in the following lists are not adequately monitored 

throughout their respective distributions. 

• Four breeding species and one wintering species currently on the PIF Watch List occur in BCR 

69: White-crowned Pigeon, Mangrove Cuckoo, Antillean Nighthawk, Black Swift, and wintering 

Prairie Warblers. 

• Six BCR 69 species would qualify for the Watch List under “multiple causes for inclusion”: 

Plain Pigeon (Columba inornata), Puerto Rican Parrot (Amazona vittata), Puerto Rican Nightjar 

(Caprimulgus noctitherus), White-necked Crow (Corvus leucognaphalus;; extirpated from both 

Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands), Elfin-Woods Warbler (Dendroica angelae), and Yellowshouldered Blackbird (Agelaius xanthomus). All of these species are in need of Immediate 

Action and all but one species (Elfin-Woods Warbler, which is a candidate for Federal listing) 

are already treated under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. 

• Two BCR 69 species would qualify for the Watch List under “moderately abundant but 

undergoing declines or having high threat.” These are the Puerto Rican Vireo (Vireo latimeri) 

and the Greater Antillean Oriole (Icterus dominicensis). 

• Two BCR 69 species would qualify for the Watch List under “restricted distributions and low 

population size.” These are the Lesser Antillean Pewee (Contopus latirostris) and the 

Adelaide’s Warbler (Dendroica adelaidae). 
Section B. Appendices 313

• Ten species endemic to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands would qualify as Stewardship 

Species for the West Indies: Puerto Rican Lizard-Cuckoo (Saurothera vieilloti), Puerto Rican 

Screech-Owl (Otus nudipes), Green Mango (Anthracothorax viridis), Puerto Rican Emerald 

(Chlorostilbon maugaeus), Puerto Rican Tody (Todus mexicanus), Puerto Rican Woodpecker 

(Melanerpes portoricensis), Puerto Rican Flycatcher (Myarchus antillarum), Puerto Rican 

Spindalis (Spindalis portoricensis), Puerto Rican Tanager (Nesospingus speculiferus), and 

Puerto Rican Bullfinch (Loxigilla portoricensis). 

Continentally, these endemic species are considered secure as their Puerto Rican populations 

are considered secure. However, populations of Puerto Rican Screech-Owl and Puerto Rican 

Flycatcher occurring on the Virgin Islands are nearing extirpation or are extirpated. These two 

regionally endemic but locally extirpated species, along with White-necked Crow mentioned 

above, join other regional species of high concern or threat (e.g., Antillean Mango 

[Anthracothorax dominicus], Bridled Quail-Dove [Geotrygon mystacea]) in representing the 

highest territorial priority species in need of conservation attention. 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCE PROTECTION 

ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT 

The following is information extracted from the “Caribbean Ecosystem Plan” prepared by a team 

of Service biologists in October 2000. Although the plan was prepared prior to inclusion of 

Vieques lands within the Caribbean Refuges, as part of the U.S. Caribbean Ecosystem, 

management of these lands will be an integral part of the Service program for the Caribbean. 

The priorities and strategies developed for the “Ecosystem Plan” have been considered and, 

where appropriate, have been adopted and included in the Vieques Refuge Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan. 

Ecosystem Description 

The Caribbean Ecosystem area is a composite of islands centrally located in the Antilles 

Archipelago, which stretches from Cuba eastward to Puerto Rico and then in an arc to South 

America. These islands serve as resting and feeding sites for migratory birds utilizing the 

Atlantic Flyway. Since Puerto Rico is one of the last large land masses as the archipelago 

curves eastward, many migratory birds rest and feed here and then fly directly to South America 

with few or no land stops. The resting and feeding habitats for these birds in Puerto Rico and 

the U.S. Virgin Islands form a bottleneck for migratory birds. Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin 

Islands, and many other islands in the Antilles have seen a great reduction in freshwater 

wetlands, coastal salt flats and mangroves (important resources for waterfowl and migratory 

shore and wading birds) as a result of coastal development and agriculture. 

St. Thomas, St. John, St. Croix, and 58 smaller islands and keys, most of which have been 

designated as wildlife reserves by the government, are included in the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

There are about 233 linear miles of shoreline, of which about 150 miles are sandy beaches 

important as sea turtle nesting habitat. St. Croix includes Sandy Point National Wildlife Refuge, 

the largest leatherback turtle nesting beach in U.S. ownership, and the offshore keys of Green 

Cay National Wildlife Refuge and Buck Island National Monument, which are important for the 

endangered St. Croix ground lizard, nesting sea birds, and turtles. St. John, mostly under 

National Park Service management, was designated as a Biosphere Reserve by the United 

Nations and Salt River Bay, St. Croix, the largest mangrove forest and lagoon in the U.S. Virgin 
314 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Islands, was designated as a Department of the Interior National Park Service Historic 

Landmark. Recently, the Coastal Wetland Conservation Program provided funding to acquire 

an additional 2.4 acres of mangrove forest at Salt River Bay. 

In addition to the main island of Puerto Rico, the smallest and easternmost island of the Greater 

Antilles, the commonwealth also includes the islands of Culebra, Vieques, Caja de Muertos, 

Mona, and numerous smaller islands and keys. The commonwealth manages 17 forests, 7 

natural reserves, and 4 refuges, more than 50 percent of which include coastal habitats, for a 

total of 93,000 acres and 400 linear miles of shoreline. Mangrove forests, coastal lagoons, 

Pterocarpus forests, seagrass beds, sea turtle nesting beaches, and coral reefs are among the 

most ecologically important coastal habitats. The Caribbean Islands National Wildlife Refuge 

manages 8 refuges in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, totaling 5,573 acres, including 16 

small islands and keys in Puerto Rico important for seabirds and sea turtles. The Caribbean 

National Forest is the only tropical forest managed by the USDA Forest Service and provides 

habitat for the federally endangered Puerto Rican Parrot. Together with the commonwealth’s 

Guánica Forest, both are considered unique and have been recognized by the United Nations 

as Biosphere Reserves. The Forest Service designated the Río Abajo Commonwealth Forest 

as a National Forest Landmark and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

designated Bahia de Jobos as a National Estuarine Research Reserve. 

As a tropical environment supporting tremendous biodiversity, the Caribbean Ecosystem 

contains habitats ranging from rain forests to coral reefs, including dry and moist karst forests, 

mud and salt flats, mangrove forests, coastal lagoons, and seagrass beds. However, because 

of their small size and relative proximity to one another, the alteration or destruction of any 

portion of a single habitat type may have an incremental effect on several species, many of 

which are already federally threatened or endangered. Currently, 78 species (29 animals and 

49 plants) are federally listed as threatened or endangered in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin 

Islands. The increased number of species added in recent years and the large list of species of 

concern reflect the precarious state of the habitats and the detrimental effects of human 

impacts. In addition to the species for which the Service has direct trust responsibility, there are 

many other endangered species existing in the neighboring island nations of the Greater and 

Lesser Antilles, where similar habitat problems exist. Also, the coastal shelf habitat serves as a 

nursery for fishery resources of commercial, sport, and food web importance, under the primary 

jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service. Exploitation and degradation of these 

habitats have reduced the populations of many of these species to critical levels. 

Habitat destruction is rampant in the Caribbean. Clearing for agriculture, unchecked urban 

development, and poor land uses have led to the virtual elimination of coastal forests and most 

of the inland forests. The remaining coastal hardwood forests are in danger from the continuing 

threat of destruction for coastal developments, primarily for tourism and marinas. The damming 

and channelization of the major rivers have reduced the water flow and altered the estuarine 

wetland’s ability to filter contaminants and sediment, thus increasing siltation and destroying 

seagrass beds and coral reefs. 

The Fish and Wildlife Service is recognized as a lead agency for the conservation of natural 

resources in the Caribbean Ecosystem. Working in cooperation with the commonwealth, 

territorial, other federal organizations, and the private sector, we have furthered our commitment 

and scope of influence beyond our boundaries by providing technical assistance and support. 

The Caribbean Ecosystem is not an isolated unit, but part of a larger chain of islands stretching 

from Florida to South America and sharing common waters that are suffering from the same 

human impacts and threats to their resources as Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, but 
Section B. Appendices 315

whose governments are as equally committed to conservation and protection of these unique 

resources. The Caribbean Ecosystem Team, through improved partnerships, has the 

opportunity to lead in the conservation of the biodiversity of the region, to continue to provide 

technical support on issues and trust responsibilities, and to function as a liaison between 

neighboring governments. 

Team Mission

The Mission of the Caribbean Ecosystem Team is to restore, protect, enhance and conserve 

Caribbean fish and wildlife trust resources and their habitats for present and future generations. 

We will accomplish this through: (1) the development of partnerships with others; (2) adaptive 

management based on best available information and science; and (3) outreach. 

Ecosystem Team Priority Issues (for a 5-year time frame) 

The Caribbean Ecosystem Team met in April 1999, and identified 14 priority significant areas of 

concern. The team agreed to place highest attention on the first eight of these issues as there 

was a high level of team consensus on these issues: 

1. Improving law enforcement capability 

2. Protection of coastal resources 

3. Minimize habitat loss and degradation 

4. Sensitive species recovery 

5. Protection of karst 

6. Funding needs 

7. Improving communications 

8. Land acquisition 

9. Improving biological capability 

10. Habitat restoration 

11. Establishment of partnerships 

12. Control of invasive species 

13. Riparian issues 

14. Fisheries management 

Using the above priorities, the team’s committees met and developed the following strategic 

plan for guiding the team through the next 5 years. 

Strategic Plan (for a 5-year period) 

A. Coastal and uplands 

 Goal: Protect, restore, and enhance Caribbean ecosystems through minimizing habitat loss 

and degradation, improving land use practices, protecting rare and endangered species and 

their habitat, improving cooperation with other agencies, increasing law enforcement

capabilities, and improving management of refuges. 

 Objective 1. Identification and collection of geographically specific data 
316 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Strategies: 

y Identify sensitive areas adjacent to currently protected federal lands (refuges, National 

Park Service, USDA Forest Service, Department of Defense) for possible land 

acquisition or protection by other means. Process to begin with refuge lands. 

y Identify rare habitat types and sensitive wetland areas in need of protection through the 

compilation of existing information and preparation of lists and maps. 

y Obtain Puerto Rico Planning Board zoning maps through becoming a participant in 

MOU/MOA with the Board for access to information on the internet. (Ongoing) 

y Conduct biological review with regional refuge biologist team to speed the 

comprehensive conservation planning process and provide direction for inventory and 

monitoring programs. 

y Develop list of invasive species and develop plans for eradication and/or control on 

refuge lands and assist other agencies in implementing programs. Use GIS to develop 

presence/absence maps of nonnative, invasive species, beginning with refuge lands. 

y Identify estuarine areas important to fisheries. 

y Improve staff GIS capability by acquiring equipment and providing training for ecosystem 

team members. (Ongoing) 

Objective 2. Promote better land use practices in order to protect important wildlife habitat, 

including threatened and endangered species. 

Strategies: 

y Develop standards for shade coffee plantations to improve/create wildlife habitat and 

present to USDA for adoption. (Ongoing) 

y Identify and target one additional threatened and endangered species on private land for 

use/application of partners program. 

y Develop package/standards for erosion control measures that would be consistent with 

providing protection of wildlife habitat. 

y Promote land use practices in the Lajas Valley to benefit wetland systems through active 

participation in non-governmental organization, agency initiatives (Puerto Rico Planning 

Board, Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service). 

y In order to better protect coral reefs and seagrass beds, identify problematic rivers in 

sensitive areas. 

Objective 3. Protect rare, threatened, and endangered species and their habitats and 

migratory birds. 

Strategies: 

y Continue efforts towards land acquisition for Rio Encantado refuge, including 

identification of landowners. (Ongoing) 

y Implement and promote a habitat conservation planning program in Puerto Rico. 

(Ongoing) 

y Incorporate active management of threatened and endangered species into plan 

preparation for refuges. 
Section B. Appendices 317

y Develop and implement mechanisms for the protection of manatees, including 

inventorying speed zones, obtaining information from other agencies on areas of heavy 

boat use, and identifying feeding and calving areas. 

y Increase level of coordination and implementation of conservation activities for sea 

turtles, including determination of level of use of beaches by sea turtles, utilization of 

tools such as HCP, section 7, partners to minimize impacts in specific geographic area. 

y Develop propagation program for threatened and endangered plants. (Ongoing) 

Objective 4. Protect and restore riparian and wetland systems from a watershed 

perspective. 

Strategies: 

y Conduct workshop and follow-up on natural river design. (Ongoing) 

y Develop and promote a package for restoration of aquatic stream habitat (e.g., minimum 

flows and fishways). 

y Develop and promote through available incentive programs criteria for restoration of 

reparian buffers. 

y Nominate CRSF as a RAMSAR site. 

y Identify and prioritize habitat restoration projects on refuge lands. 

Objective 5. Increase law enforcement capabilities in the Caribbean. 

Strategies: 

y Staff wildlife inspector position in San Juan. 

y Conduct law enforcement orientation (workshop) on wildlife laws and regulations. 

y Evaluate need for additional special agent position (Habitat Conservation Plan and 

permit implementation). 

 

B. Partnerships 

 

Goal: Use partnerships to implement identified goals and objectives for the protection, 

enhancement, and restoration of fish and wildlife resources within the Caribbean Ecosystem. 

Objective 1. Identify and implement potential partnerships in order to address specific goals 

and objectives identified in upland and coastal ecosystems. 

Strategies: 

y Identify potential partners within private and public sectors (state and federal agencies). 

y Identify action items in coastal and upland systems, as well as in education/outreach, 

where partnerships are needed. 

y Proactively invite the appropriate entities to be Service partners in specific tasks. 

y Formalize partnerships through written documents (MOU, MOA, etc.) 
318 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

y Establish partnerships with agricultural community in areas adjacent to Laguna 

Cartagena and Cabo Rojo National Wildlife Refuges. 

y Assist in strengthening partnerships with refuge neighbors, and state and federal 

agencies in Culebra. 

y Assist in strengthening partnerships with refuge neighbors, state, and federal agencies 

in St. Croix. 

Objective 2. Use partnerships to exchange technical expertise and information between 

agencies. 

Strategies: 

y Conduct short-term details for cross-training. 

y Conduct workshops between agencies on specific issues. 

y Initiate interagency meeting to evaluate development projects with the Service, the 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, the Puerto Rico Planning Board, 

the Environmental Quality Board, and in the Virgin Islands. 

y Provide opportunities and funds for training to staff of Puerto Rico/Virgin Islands 

agencies. 

y Promote exchange of information on land management problems among the Service, 

the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, the National Park Service, and 

non-governmental organizations. 

y Look for internal/ecosystem partnership opportunities (i.e., mutual assistance). 

y Intra-ecosystem short-term details (i.e., commitment to exchange personnel, possibly 

short-term (day) or longer term (several weeks), help cover vacations, etc. 

Objective 3. Create international partnerships to exchange information on 

management/protection of Fish and Wildlife Service resources. 

Strategies: 

y Attend international meetings related to fish and wildlife resources of concern. 

y Increase the participation from the ecosystem offices with different international affairs’ 

activities in the Caribbean (i.e., migratory birds, sea turtles, fisheries, and coral reefs). 

y Strengthen law enforcement collaboration and participation in international law 

enforcement. 

C. Outreach and Education 

Goal: Create awareness and understanding of the Fish and Wildlife Service role in the 

conservation and management of trust resources for the benefit of present and future 

generations. 

Objective 1. Priority Issue: Improving law enforcement capability. 
Section B. Appendices 319

Strategies: 

y Development of news releases (Note: This item will be a component of all the listed 

priority issues). 

y Obtain and distribute the new “Buyer Beware/ Caribbean” brochure in Spanish. 

(Ongoing) 

y Produce a permanent interactive illegal trade/CITES exhibit for the San Juan 

International Airport. 

y Produce a video on sea turtle lighting disorientation and methods of minimization or 

prevention. 

y Organize a minimum of two meetings per year with the Fish and Wildlife Service and 

local resource agencies concerning laws and current enforcement issues. 

y Present workshops for Department of Natural and Environmental Resources’ officers on 

federal laws, or incorporate federal laws into the officers’ basic training. 

y Work cooperatively with Department of Natural and Environmental Resources to 

produce an informational brochure or fact sheet concerning exotic pets. 

Objective 2. Protection of Coastal Resources 

Strategies: 

y Produce and distribute a Fish and Wildlife Service video highlighting coastal resources 

and threats. 

y Design and construct an informational kiosk for the Cabo Rojo Salt Flats. 

y Organize a minimum of two meetings per year to discuss outreach needs with 

Department of Natural and Environmental Resources on Cabo Rojo Salt Flats. 

y Develop general fact sheets on mangroves, seagrass beds, coral reefs, etc. 

y Develop individual refuge fact sheets for Cabo Rojo Salt Flats, and Culebra and Sandy 

Point Refuges. 

y Design and construct an interpretive nature trail at Sandy Point Refuge. 

Objective 3. Reduce Habitat Loss and Degradation 

y Develop a fact sheet on contaminant issues. 

y Ensure that new “Partner’s” position (FTE) produces program information in Spanish. 

y Ensure active participation on the part of the Fish and Wildlife Service in at least one 

annual beach clean-up. 

y Develop poster, brochure/fact sheet on native river species. Develop training for natural 

river restoration practices. 

Objective 4. Sensitive Species Recovery 

 Strategies: 

y Develop a teacher training workshop on threatened and endangered species. 

y Produce and distribute a Caribbean Ecosystem video. (Ongoing) 

y Produce and distribute an endangered species power point presentation. 

y Organize and open ecosystem library for Fish and Wildlife Service personnel. (Ongoing) 

y Develop an ecosystem home page that highlights each field office. (Ongoing) 
320 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

y Develop threatened and endangered species posters, brochures, and teachers’ kits. 

y Develop Puerto Rican Parrot educational material (e.g., poster, brochure, and color fact 

sheets). 

y Turtle watch program, Sandy Point Refuge. (Ongoing) 

y Sea turtle summer camp, Sandy Point Refuge. 

Objective 5. Protection of Karst 

Strategies: 

y Develop informational fact sheet on the KARST. (Ongoing) 

y Compile existing information and prepare a fact sheet for shade coffee vs. sun coffee. 

(Ongoing) 

y Develop an outreach plan for Karst refuge acquisition process. 

Objective 6. Funding Needs 

 Strategies: 

y Establish an outreach specialist/volunteer coordinator (1) FTE for Caribbean Island 

National Wildlife Refuges. 

y Establish an outreach specialist (PTE) for Sandy Point Refuge’s turtle watch program 

and summer camp. 

y Allocate time and provide funding for official personnel responsible for 

outreach/education within Puerto Rican Parrot Project. 

y Identify and provide for individual field station funding needs for outreach/education. 

y Establish funding for volunteer program. 

y Provide computer access to all employees with Internet and e-mail capability. 

Objective 7. Communications/Inreach 

 Strategies: 

y Create a quarterly ecosystem electronic newsletter. 

y Promote cross-training and short-term work details. 

y Implement a training course at NCTC on basic communication skills for all employees. 

y Monthly staff meetings for each field office (requisite). 

y Need to receive Federal Aid reports sent to Ecological Services office and have early 

input on Federal Aid projects from Ecological Services office. 

Objective 8. Land Acquisition 

 Strategy: 

y Utilize news releases, Internet home page, and other sources to inform the public of 

completed land acquisition. 
Section B. Appendices 321
322 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

APPENDIX XII. Draft Community Interest 

Survey Conducted by University of Puerto 

Rico Sea Grant College Program 

Survey Results Regarding Interest on the Part of the Vieques Community in the Use of the 

Vieques National Wildlife Refuge and the Potential of the Community to Participate with the 

Service in the Development and Implementation of the Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

for the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Prepared by 

Ruperto Chaparro M.A. 

And 

Manuel Valdés Pizzini, Ph.D. 

University of Puerto Rico 

Sea Grant College Program 

DRAFT 

March, 15, 2006 
323

Acknowledgements 

The completion of this project was made possible by the special efforts of many who deserve 

recognition. Several students that were responsible for the development of the questionnaire and 

data collection: Mayrim Bacó, Carlos Carrero, Melissa Lugo, Ricardo Ortega, Yahaira Hernández, 

María Fernández, Verónica Colón, Yadira Rodriguez, Norberto Medina and Prudencio Rodriguez. 

We acknowledge the staff of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service who helped in so many ways: Oscar 

Díaz, Susan Silander and Gisela Burgos. 

We are appreciative of the staff of the University of Puerto Rico Sea Grant College Program for their 

support and assistance. From start to completion this has been a team effort. Also we want to thank 

Dr. Walter Diaz from the Center for Applied Social Sciences for his assistance with the survey design 

and Vieques representative sample. 

Finally, we need to acknowledge the respondents to the Vieques community who took the time to 

respond to this survey. Hopefully their efforts will ensure that the process to complete the Vieques 

National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan integrates the community sector. 

 RCS 

 MVP 
324 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Table of Contents 

Acknowledgements i 

List of Tables ii 

Introduction 1 

Methodology and Sampling Process 1 

Trips to Vieques Table 3 

Survey Design 5 

How this Report is Organized 6 

A Profile of the Residents of Vieques 7 

Gender of Respondents 8 

Community of Respondents 8 

Occupation 9 

Knowledge About Community Organizations in Vieques 10 

Availability of Recreational Spaces and Facilities 10 

Recommended Recreational Spaces and Facilities 11 

Knowledge of Vieques Respondents Regarding the Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan (CCP) 12 

What Should be Included in the CCP? 12 

Interest to Capacity Building in Matters Related to the CCP 13 

Why are you Interested in learning or Receive Any Capacity Building 

About the CCP 13 

Are You Interested in Receiving Information About the CCP 13 

Interest of Respondents to participate in the Planning and Development 

of the CCP, Recreation Facilities, Cultural Activities or commercial Activities 14 

Interest to Participate Actively in Educational Activities for the Community 15 

Degree of Satisfaction Regarding the actual State of Vieques Natural Resources 16 
325

Is the CCP Beneficial to the Community of Vieques 16 

Who Should Participate in the Development of the CCP 17 

Benefits for the Community of Vieques Derived from the Management 

of the Natural Resources Proposed by the CCP 18 

Interest in Using the Resources of the Reserve 19 

Conclusions 20 

Attachments 22 

 Census Tracts 23 

 Vieques: Distritos Censales 24 

 Vieques: bloques dentro de un distrito censal 25 

 Vieques: Vivienda 26 
326 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Introduction 

Understanding of the people’s perceptions and needs is an important first step in the development of 

appropriate programs for the conservation of nature. Conservation requires participation of the local 

communities, as they become the stewards of the resources, jointly with the government agencies 

chartered for that purpose. Identification of the key issues, perceived needs and the public opinion 

on the process is essential. 

 

As part of a collaboration to assist the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the development of the 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) to guide the use of natural resources and the management 

of the Vieques Refuge at the island municipality of Vieques, the University of Puerto Rico Sea Grant 

College Program was funded to conduct a study to integrate knowledge from all community sectors of 

Vieques. Our study focused on a sample of the Vieques residents, who were interviewed to learn 

about their needs, potential and willingness to collaborate in the development of the CCP. 

This report presents results from the survey of Vieques residents. Data collection began in February, 

2005 and was concluded in May, 2005. 

The key objectives of this project were the following: 

1. Assess the potential and willingness of the community to participate in the: Co-management of 

the refuge, design of the Educational and Outreach Plan in reference to the wise use of the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service Vieques Refuge and in the preparation of its Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan. 

2. Identify actual uses of Vieques natural resources and the recreational and economic 

opportunities offered by these. 

3. Identify the level of knowledge of the Vieques community regarding the Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan to be developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the process to 

develop it. 

Methodology and sampling process 

A multistage cluster sampling proceedure was applied to the Vieques population for this project. The 

sampling process consisted of four stages: census tracts, census blocks (inside tracts), housing units 

(inside blocks) and individuals (inside living units). The number of individuals to be interviewed, the 

sample number was of three hundred (n=300), equivalent to one interview for living quarter selected. 

The first stage consisted of the selection of the census tracts. Since there are only four census tracts 

in Vieques, all tracts were included. In fact, this implies that each tract was assigned a selection 

probability of 1 (P=1). 

Census blocks were selected inside each district and were assigned a proportional probability to size 

(or PPS) in relation to the amount of living units in Vieques. For example if a district has 25% of the 

housing units of Vieques, they will provide 25% of the sample .25 x 300 = 75 interviews. Having 

determined that each census block provides 10 living units to the sample, then we need to select 8 

blocks from this hypothetical district. 

To select the 10 blocks, these were ordered in ascending order based on the amount of living or 

housing units contained. Then, random numbers were assigned to each block according to the 
327

amount of housing units per block. For example, if the block with the smallest amount of living units 

had 5, then numbers from 1-5 corresponded to this block. If the next block had 125 housing units, 

the numbers that corresponded were 6-130 successively. For the selection of 8 blocks, we 

generatde 8 random numbers to determine which were the selected blocks. If we picked number 

127, we selected the second block since it contained the numbers up to 130. 

Once the blocks were selected, we proceeded to select the housing units in the blocks. For this we 

utilize the method of systemmatic selection with an random starting point. The person interviewing 

the residents was provided with a map of the block with indications of where he or she had to start 

counting living units, a number that indicates the sampling interval (every how many living untis he 

will attempt an interview) and the number of the living unit in which he will attempt an interview. If the 

block had 100 living units and 10 interviews were required, then, the interval is of one of each ten 

living units. The random start is determined by generating a random number between 1 and 10. If 

we pick 6, this means that he will attempt an interview in the six living unit starting at the point where 

it was established to start counting living units. This means that he will attempt the first interview in 

the six living units, the next one will be in the 16 (6 + 10) successively. 

Once the living unit is selected, the person to be interviewed is selected in an aleatory process. This 

is done by selecting the person whose birthday is closest to the date where contact with the living unit 

was made. 

Example of maps and data base used for the calculations are included in an attachment. 

Once all interviews were completed data was analyzed with SPSS PC. 
328 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Trips to Vieques Dates Participating Sudents 

Trip number 1 February 4 – 7, 2005 Carlos Carrero * 

Melissa Lugo * 

Mayrim Bacó  

Ricardo Ortega * 

Yahaira Hernández * 

María Fernández r

 Total of students: 6 

Trip number 2 February18 – 21, 2005 Carlos Carrero * 

Melissa Lugo * 

Ricardo Ortega * 

Yahaira Hernández * 

María Fernández r

 Total of students: 5 

Trip number 3 March 4 - 7, 2005 Carlos Carrero * 

Melissa Lugo * 

Mayrim Bacó  

Ricardo Ortega * 

Yahaira Hernández * 

María Fernández r

Verónica Colón *** 

 Total of students: 7 

Trip number 4 March 11 - 14, 2005 Carlos Carrero * 

Melissa Lugo * 

Yahaira Hernández * 

María Fernández r

Sandra Lebrón  

 Total of students: 5 

Trip number 5 March 18 – 22, 2005 Carlos Carrero * 

Mayrim Bacó  

Ricardo Ortega * 

Yahaira Hernández * 

Verónica Colón *** 

 Total of students: 5 
329

Trips to Vieques Dates Participating S 

udents 

Trip number 6 April 15 - 18, 2005 Yadira Rodríguez ** 

Norberto Medina  

Mayrim Bacó ** 

 Total of students: 3 

Trip number 7 April 22 – 25, 2005 Carlos Carrero * 

Melissa Lugo * 

Ricardo Ortega * 

Yahaira Hernández * 

María Fernández r

Verónica Colón *** 

Yadira Rodríguez ** 

Mayrim Bacó  

Norberto Medina  

 Total of students: 9 

Trip number 8 April 29 – May 2, 2005 Carlos Carrero* 

Melissa Lugo* 

Ricardo Ortega * 

Yahaira Hernández * 

María Fernández r

Yadira Rodríguez ** 

Mayrim Bacó  

Norberto Medina  

 Toal of students: 8 

y Graduate Students UPR - Río Piedras Campus 

** Undergraduate Students the UPR - Mayagüez Campus 

*** Graduate Students Interamerican University of San Germán 

r UPRM Student Interchange Program - Spain 

7 Graduate Student UPR - Mayaguez Campus 

 Bachelor Degree in Social Sciences UPR - Mayagüez Campus 

L Undergraduate Student UPR - Aguadilla Campus 
330 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Survey Design 

A seven page questionnaire was designed based on questions developed by Sea Grant staff and 

graduate students from the University of Puerto Rico’s School of Planning. Advice and suggestions 

for additional questions and their formatting were solicited from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and 

UPR-Mayagüez Department of Social Sciences. The survey was conducted by 7 graduate students 

trained at the Center for Applied Social Research of the UPR-Mayagüez, Department of Social 

Sciences, and two undergraduate students with no previous experience in the interview process, who 

were trained by the principal investigators for this study. 

The students initiated the interview by introducing themselves and explaining the purpose and 

objectives of the survey. If the person agreed to be interviewed then the questionnaire opened up 

with questions regarding socio-demographic data. First respondents were asked how long they had 

been living in Vieques. Second they were asked the name of the community where they lived. Third 

they were asked how long they had been living in this community. Fourth they were asked what they 

do for a living. 

Next, people were asked if they knew of the existence of any community group or organization in 

Vieques. If the answer was positive they were asked to name the organization(s), what was their 

mission, needs and if they were members of this organization. Residents were asked what were the 

primary needs of Vieques natural resources and why. They were also questioned about the 

recreation spaces or facilities available to the Vieques community. Residents were asked specific 

recommendations regarding other recreational facilities and spaces besides the ones previously 

mentioned. 

In the next section respondents were asked how much they knew about the Conservation 

Comprehensive Plan (CCP) for the Vieques Refuge and its implementation. They were also asked 

about what things should be included in the CCP and if they needed to learn more on this area. 

Respondents were also asked if they were interested in receiving information regarding what is the 

CCP for Vieques. Willingness to participate in the planning and development of the CCP, 

recreational facilities, cultural or commercial activities and why was also inquired. A request was 

made to prioritize the alternatives in which they were willing to participate. Finally, we were interested 

in knowing if they would like to be active in the development of community educational activities 

related to the CCP and the knowledge or abilities they were willing to provide. 

Residents were questioned regarding their degree of satisfaction with respect to the state of Vieques 

natural resources and if they believed that the CCP would be of benefit for the Vieques community 

and why. They were also inquired with respect to what persons or organizations should be part of the 

development and implementation of the CCP. Information was requested regarding how the Vieques 

community could benefit from the management of the natural resources as proposed by the CCP. 

Specifically, respondents were asked to enumerate examples of economic opportunities for the 

community, derived from the Vieques Refuge; what activities they practiced inside of the Vieques 

Refuge; what recreational activities they would like to practice in the refuge; and what activities they 

would like to practice in the refuge and were actually not allowed. They were also asked regarding 

their interest in using the refuge’s natural resources. 

Finally, residents were asked if they were interested in participating in public hearings about the 

conservation and use of Vieques natural resources and endangered species. As a last question they 

were asked regarding their interest in adding something to the interview. 
331

After survey design was completed, the questionnaire was translated into English by personnel from 

the UPRSGCP. The translated version was revised to ensure that the questions held the same 

meaning in both versions. Any discrepancies were investigated, and when necessary, re-worded. 

How this Report is Organized: 

The report presents results from the survey of Vieques residents to assess the potential and 

willingness of the community to participate in the: Co-management of the refuge, in the design of the 

Educational and Outreach Plan in reference to the wise use of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Vieques Refuge and in the preparation of its Comprehensive Conservation Plan. It identifies actual 

uses of Vieques’ natural resources, the recreational and economic opportunities offered by these 

and the level of knowledge of the Vieques community regarding the Comprehensive Conservation 

Plan to be developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the process to develop it. 

The report begins with a look at the socio economic characteristics of Vieques residents including 

their demographics. Next follows an examination of residents’ knowledge regarding community 

organizations, outdoor recreation, and the CCP. This is followed by their willingness to learn and 

participate in the planning and implementation of the CCP, their degree of satisfaction regarding the 

state of Vieques natural resources and if they believed that the CCP would be of benefit for the 

Vieques community and why. This is followed by an outline of economic opportunities for the 

community derived from the Vieques Refuge, activities they practiced inside of the Vieques Refuge, 

recreational activities they would like to practice in the refuge, activities they would like to practice in 

the refuge and were actually not allowed and their interest in using the refuge’s natural resources. 

Finally, their interest in participating in public hearings about the conservation and use of Vieques 

natural resources and endangered species are outlined in detail as well as personal commentaries 

added to the interview. 

A technical appendix document includes English and Spanish versions of the questionnaire and 

presentation letter. Tabulated results to survey questions are presented and survey design is 

explained in detail. 
332 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

A Profile of the Residents of Vieques 

In this section descriptive data on Vieques’ residents interviewed are presented. Residents 

interviewed ranged in age from 18 to 99 years of age. Only 14% of the residents interviewed were 

older than 70 years of age. However the biggest range group interviewed (20%) consisted of people 

in the range of 60 to 69 years of age. Thirty five (35%) percent of the residents interviewed were 

older than sixty years of age. Almost fifty percent (50%) of the residents interviewed were 49 years or 

younger. 

14%

17%

18% 18%

20%

7%

6%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Percentage

18 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60 - 69 70-79 >80

Age

Age Groups
333

Gender

Females

56%

Males

44%

Gender of Respondents 

Gender of respondents was well balanced having 56% females and 44% males. 

Community of Respondents 

From the 393 persons interviewed the largest group was from Monte Santo 22%, followed by 

Esperanza with 16%, Bravos de Boston 9%, Barrio Florida 8% and Santa María, Leguilleu, La PRRA 

and Estancias de Isla Nena 4% each. 

22%

16%

9% 8%

45%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Percentage

Monte Santo Esperanza Bravos de Boston Florida Otros

Community

Community of Respondents
334 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

26%

20% 20%

18%

5%

3%

8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Percentage

Homemaker Retired Government Private sector Construction Fishermen Others

Occupation

Occupation

Occupation 

Regarding occupation or employment 26% of the interviewees were housemakers, 20% were retired, 

20% were employed by either the insular or municipal governments and 18% worked for the private 

industry. Most of the people interviewed were not employed, and did not work outside their homes. 

Another 5% worked in the construction industry and 3% were fishermen, the latter a key occupation 

in this insular setting. Forty percent (40%) of the Vieques residents interviewed were housemakers or 

retired allowing them more flexibility in the use of their leisure time. They are indeed potential 

collaborators in the process of conservation, and the design of strategies for the appropriate use of 

the natural areas. The occupation of the remaining 8% ranged from airplane mechanics to 

professional boxers. 
335

Knowledge about community organizations in Vieques 

Almost seventy percent (67%) of the residents of Vieques interviewed for this study were not familiar 

with the existence of a community organization in Vieques. Only thirty two percent (32%) knew of at 

least one community organization in Vieques. This is a telling piece of information that may be used 

to design strategies for the networking of local communities and organizations, and individuals. 

Know community organization

Do not know community 

organization

67%

Know community 

organization

32%
336 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Availability of recreational spaces and facilities 

Thirty percent (30%) of the respondents thought that Vieques does not have recreational spaces or 

facilities available for the community, or it has just a few. Twenty eight percent (28%) named the 

coliseum, baseball parks and basketball courts as the available spaces and facilities for recreation. 

Eighteen percent (18%) of those interviewed mentioned beaches, beach parks or public beaches 

(“balnearios”), or other resources related to the coastal and marine resources like el Malecón, la 

Esperanza, and the bioluminescent bay as the recreational spaces or facilities available to the 

community. Ten percent (10%) considered passive parks as the available recreation spaces or 

facilities. These responses underscore the public perception (also available in the main island of 

Puerto Rico) that recreational spaces consist of ballparks and basketball courts. 

13%

10%

19%

30%

10%

2%

9%

5%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percentage

Beaches Coliseum Baseball

Parks

None/Few Pasive Parks Other Courts Sun Bay

Recreation Spaces

Available Recreation Spaces
337

Recommended recreational spaces or facilities 

Fifty percent (50%) of those interviewed pointed out that Vieques needed more recreational facilities 

while forty eight percent (48%) stated that Vieques needed more sports facilities. Only two percent 

(2%) thought that Vieques needs educational facilities. 

Knowledge of Vieques respondents regarding the Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan (CCP) 

More than half of the respondents (52%) expressed a complete lack of knowledge regarding the 

CCP. Twenty four percent (24%) knew very little and 18% said they knew more or less. Six percent 

of respondents expressed they knew enough or a lot about the CCP. Our experience with responses 

to these types of questions suggests that the majority of the respondents do not have a basic 

knowledge of the CCP. Our best estimate is that at least 10% of the respondents have some 

knowledge of the CCP. 

48%

50%

2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Percentage

Sports Facilities Recreational Facilities Educational Facilities

Facilities

Recommended Facilities
338 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

52%

24%

18%

3% 3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Percentage

Nothing Very Little More or less Enough A lot

Degree of Knowledge

How much do you know about the CCP

What should be included in the CCP? 

Due to the general lack of knowledge in the community regarding the CCP only four percent (4%) of 

the respondents answered this question. Recommendations included to grow sugar cane, prohibit 

the sale of land to non residents and the distribution of the land among residents (“viequenses”). The 

results of the response to the question validate our estimate of 10% of the respondents having some 

knowledge of the CCP. This is an important finding that must help shape the educational strategies 

for the development of the CCP. 
339

Capacitate about the CCP

Willing to capacitate 

82%

Not willing to 

capacitate

18%

Interest to capacity building in matters related to the CCP 

Eighty two percent (82%) of those interviewed were willing to engage in capacity building activities, in 

matters related to the CCP. These responses underscore the lack of knowledge and the need for an 

effective educational and information transfer program. Only eighteen percent (18%) expressed in a 

negative way regarding their education about the CCP. 

Why are you interested in learning or receive any capacity building about 

the CCP? 

Answers to this question were varied. They included: 1) because there is no information available; 2) 

if the community is educated we can integrate; 3) there is a need to educate our youngsters; and 4) 

we need to be informed about what is happening in Vieques. 
340 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Are you interested in receiving information about the CCP. 

Seventy five percent (75%) of those interviewed have a lot of interest (49%) and enough interest 

(28%) in receiving information about the CCP. Fifteen percent (15%) said more or less and nine 

percent (9%) said they had very little or no interest in receiving information about the CCP. 

6%

3%

15%

26%

49%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Percentage

Nothing Very little More or less Enough A lot

Degree of Interest

Interest in receiving information about the CCP
341

Interest of respondents to participate in the planning and development of 

the CCP, recreation facilities, cultural activities or commercial activities. 

Seventy percent (70%) of respondents expressed an interest to participate in the planning and 

development of recreational facilities in Vieques. Twenty eight percent (28%) expressed an interest 

to participate in the planning and development of cultural and commercial activities in Vieques. 

However, only two percent (2%) of respondents expressed an interest to participate in the planning 

and development of the CCP. 

2%

70%

19%

9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Percentage

Conservation of Natural

Resources

Recreational Facilities Cultural Activities Commercial Activities

Degree of Interest

Interest to participate in the planning and development of the CCP
342 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Willingness to participate in educational activities for 

the community

Not willing to 

participate

30%

Willing to participate

70%

Interest to participate actively in educational activities for the community 

Seventy percent (70%) of those interviewed expressed interest to participate in educational activities 

for the community. Thirty percent (30%) expressed that they were not interested in participating in 

educational activities for the community. 
343

3%

18%

37%

26%

15%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Percentage

Very Satisfied Satisfied Indiferent Unsatisfied Totally Unsatisfied

Degree of satisfaction

Degree of Satisfaction in Relation to the Actual State of 

Vieques Natural Resources

Degree of satisfaction regarding the actual state of Vieques natural 

resources 

Forty one percent (41%) of Vieques residents interviewed expressed that they were unsatisfied (26%) 

or totally unsatisfied (15%) with the state of Vieques’ natural resources. Unexpectedly, thirty seven 

percent (37%) of the respondents are indifferent to the state of their natural resources. More 

surprisingly was the fact that twenty one percent (21%) were either satisfied (18%) or very satisfied 

(3%) with the state of Vieques natural resources. 
344 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

37%

13%

26%

4%

20%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Percentage

Vieques Community Municipal Government Government of PR Federal Government Community Groups

Groups

People or groups that should participate in the 

development of the CCP

Is the CCP beneficial to the Vieques community

It's not beneficial

9%

It's beneficial

91%

Environmental education, awareness of the natural resources and their potential in the wellbeing of the 

Viequenses must be in the first order of the agenda for the concerned agencies. Learning from the 

community is essential. However, there is an important road ahead in helping all the stakeholders

learn about the ecosystems, the resources and their possibilities for sustainability in Vieques 

Is the CCP beneficial to the community of Vieques 

Ninety one percent (91%) of the Vieques community interviewed thinks that the CCP is beneficial to 

the community of Vieques. Only nine percent of the Vieques community interviewed thinks that the 

CCP will not be of benefit to the community. However, respondents do not know much about the CCP 

to properly answer the question. 
345

Who should participate in the development of the CCP 

Thirty seven percent (37%) of those interviewed express that Vieques residents should participate in 

the development of the CCP. Twenty eight percent (28%) of respondents think that the government 

of Puerto Rico should participate in the development of the CCP. Twenty percent (20%) expressed 

that Vieques community groups should participate. Thirteen percent (13%) manifested that the 

municipal government should participate and only four percent (4%) thinks that the Federal 

Government should take part in the development of the CCP. Specifically the names of Ismael 

Guadalupe, Julián García, Prieto Ventura, Bob Rabin and Nilda Medina were mentioned in more than 

five occasions. 

Benefits for the community of Vieques derived from the management of 

the natural resources proposed by the CCP 

Seventy four percent (74%) of the Vieques community thinks that they can benefit a lot (41%) or 

enough (33%) from the management of the natural resources as proposed by the CCP. Sixteen 

percent (16%) responded that the community could more or less benefit from the management of the 

natural resources as proposed by the CCP. Eight percent (8%) responded that the community could 

only benefit very little (4%) or nothing at all (4%) and two percent (2%) does not know. 

4% 4%

16%

33%

41%

2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Percentage

Nothing Very Little More or less Enough A lot Don't Know

Degree of Benefit to the Community

Degree of Benefit for the Community from the 

Management of the Natural Resources Proposed by the 

CCP
346 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

10%

5%

18%

23%

44%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Percentage

Nothing Very Little More or less Enough A lot

Degree of Interest

Interest in using the resources of the Rerserve

Interest in using the resources of the reserve. 

When asked about their interest in making use of the resources of the reserve only fifteen percent 

(15%) of the community interviewed responded that they had no interest (10%) and very little interest 

(5%). Eighteen percent (18%) responded that more or less sixty seven percent (67%) said they had 

a lot of interest (44%) and twenty three percent (23%) answered enough. 
347

Conclusions 

There is a general interest in making use of the resources comprehended in the Vieques National 

Wildlife Refuge. Even though Vieques residents expressed a lack of knowledge regarding the CCP, 

they also believe that it will be beneficial for the community at large. In general, the community has a 

great interest to be capacitated in matters related to the CCP, and stated that the Vieques 

community, the municipal government, the government of Puerto Rico, the community groups and the 

federal government should participate in its development. However there is a high degree of apathy 

regarding the management of Vieques natural resources that needs to be attended. 

The distribution of age groups is well balanced with 50% of respondents younger than 50 years of 

age and the other half older. This is an indication that recreational facilities and spaces need to be 

developed considering the particular characteristics and preferences of both age groups. Active and 

passive recreation opportunities need to be considered to comply with particular access needs and 

services, disabilities and preferences. 

Gender of respondents was also well balanced and should also be taken into consideration at the 

planning and development stages of recreational facilities and spaces. Appropriate considerations 

need to be adopted with both groups since they have different needs and preferences. When 

planning the development of recreational facilities and spaces or the education and capacity building 

activities there are two groups of Vieques residents that compose 46% of the occupation category 

that need to be taken into consideration for the nature of their status. These are the retired persons 

and the homemakers. Both have flexible leisure time and special education needs and an 

extraordinary potential to provide volunteer services. This requires an effort from the U.S. Fish & 

Wildlife Service to train them. 

Community organizations need to get their message more effectively to the community. Most of 

Vieques residents are not familiar with the community organizations, their mission or objectives. An 

effort needs to be made to reach the community and educate them regarding the conservation and 

wise use of their natural resources, potential for recreational and economic opportunities from these 

resources and other cultural and social initiatives. There is an opportunity to provide workshops to 

these groups regarding the marketing of their organization, provide them with educational materials 

and collaborate with them in their outreach efforts. 

There is a lack of knowledge in the Vieques community regarding the availability of recreation spaces 

and facilities. Residents relate recreation spaces with courts, parks and sports. This can be the result 

of inadequate marketing and education efforts from the managers of the natural resources and the 

providers of recreational and educational services. There is a good opportunity for the municipal 

government of Vieques, the Department of Sports and Recreation, the Department of Natural and 

Environmental Resources (DNER), the Department of Education, community organizations and the 

USF&WS to educate the Vieques community regarding outdoor recreation opportunities offered by 

the natural resources of Vieques and a better use of their leisure time. If the community is not aware 

of the recreational opportunities offered by the natural resources they will not appreciate them or be 

concerned of its conservation. The concept of passive recreation, water sports, trails, contemplation 

of nature and outdoor education needs to be promoted in order to highlight the value of Vieques 

natural resources and conservation. Homemakers, retired persons and senior citizens are all 

potential users of the natural resources, and also important nodes in their households and 

communities, reaching children and other members of their communities. 
348 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

There is a significant need for information regarding the CCP. Most of the respondents expressed a 

lack of knowledge about the CCP but at the same time were very interested in obtaining information 

and were willing to capacitate regarding this matter and to participate in the process. This is an 

excellent opportunity to develop an outreach campaign and disseminate education information 

regarding the CCP, its objectives and benefits offered to the community. This effort is guaranteed to 

be successful since more than 80% of the residents are willing to capacitate regarding the CCP. The 

community expressed a need for information availability, education for the youngsters, they want to 

be informed of what is going on regarding the CCP and the Refuge and specifically they want to be 

learn about the process in order to integrate. The community also expressed willingness to 

participate actively in education activities for the community. 

A big part of the community is unsatisfied with the management of the natural resources. However 

there is a problem with regards to apathy and indifference from a significant part of the community. 

There is a need to educate the community regarding the management and conservation of their 

natural resources if we are to have a change of attitude toward Vieques most valuable asset. 

Outreach and education activities should be coordinated for this purpose and development and 

dissemination of information conducted. This effort needs to be coordinated by all federal and 

insular government agencies and non-governmental organizations with offices in Vieques in order to 

be effective. The CCP for the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge should be the first step towards 

educating the community and changing the attitude towards the natural resources and integrate them 

through active participation into the management of the natural resources. 

 

 

 

 

 

 
349

Attachments 
350 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 

Census Tracts
351
352 Vieques National Wildlife Refuge 
353