18744 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Notices 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment, including your 

personal identifying information, may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Authority: This notice is published under 

the authority of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement Act of 1997, Public 

Law 105–57. 

Dated: March 16, 2009. 

Cynthia K. Dohner, 

Acting Regional Director. 

[FR Doc. E9–9411 Filed 4–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R4–R–2009–N0045; 40136–1265– 

0000–S3] 

Egmont Key National Wildlife Refuge, 

Hillsborough County, FL; Pinellas 

National Wildlife Refuge, Pinellas 

County, FL; and Passage Key National 

Wildlife Refuge, Manatee County, FL 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability: draft 

comprehensive conservation plan and 

environmental assessment; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of a draft comprehensive 

conservation plan and environmental 

assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for Egmont 

Key, Pinellas, and Passage Key National 

Wildlife Refuges for public review and 

comment. These three refuges, known as 

the Tampa Bay Refuges, are managed as 

part of the Chassahowitzka National 

Wildlife Refuge (NWR) Complex. In this 

Draft CCP/EA, we describe the 

alternative we propose to use to manage 

these refuges for the 15 years following 

approval of the final CCP. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, we 

must receive your written comments by 

May 26, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the 

Draft CCP/EA should be addressed to: 

Mr. Richard J. Meyers, Assistant Refuge 

Manager, Chassahowitzka NWR 

Complex, 9500 Koger Boulevard North, 

Suite 102, St. Petersburg, FL 33702. The 

Draft CCP/EA may also be accessed and 

downloaded from the Service’s Internet 

site: http://southeast.fws.gov/planning. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Richard J. Meyers, telephone: 727/570– 

5417; e-mail: richard_meyers@fws.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

With this notice, we continue the CCP 

process for Egmont Key, Pinellas, and 

Passage Key National Wildlife Refuges. 

We started the process through a notice 

in the Federal Register on December 3, 

2004 (69 FR 70276). 

Background 

The National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee) (Improvement Act), 

which amended the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Administration Act of 

1966, requires us to develop a CCP for 

each national wildlife refuge. The 

purpose for developing a CCP is to 

provide refuge managers with a 15-year 

plan for achieving refuge purposes and 

contributing toward the mission of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System, 

consistent with sound principles of fish 

and wildlife management, conservation, 

legal mandates, and our policies. In 

addition to outlining broad management 

direction on conserving wildlife and 

their habitats, CCPs identify wildlifedependent recreational opportunities 

available to the public, including 

opportunities for hunting, fishing, 

wildlife observation, wildlife 

photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation. We will 

review and update the CCP at least 

every 15 years in accordance with the 

Improvement Act and the National 

Environmental Policy Act. 

Significant issues addressed in the 

Draft CCP/EA include: erosion; 

predatory/exotic/invasive species; 

human disturbance of wildlife, 

particularly with respect to illegal 

access to closed areas; fishing line and 

trash disposal; threatened and 

endangered species; bird and other 

wildlife surveys; environmental 

education and interpretation issues; and 

staffing, equipment, and facility needs. 

Egmont Key National Wildlife Refuge 

(NWR) includes 392 acres and was 

established in 1974 to protect its 

significant natural, historical, and 

cultural resources from the impending 

threats of development. Egmont Key 

NWR is the only refuge island open to 

the public and has been traditionally 

visited for many years as a primary 

recreation destination. Egmont Key 

NWR seeks to provide nesting habitat 

for brown pelicans and other 

waterbirds, as well as to conserve and 

protect barrier island habitat and to 

preserve historical structures of national 

significance (i.e., historic lighthouse, 

guard house, gun batteries, and brick 

roads). Presently, the island’s 

approximately 244 acres of beach and 

coastal berm support more than 110 

species of nesting, migrating, and 

wintering birds. The island is listed as 

critical habitat for endangered piping 

plovers and provides habitat and 

protection for endangered manatees and 

sea turtles. Egmont Key NWR has an 

unusually high population of gopher 

tortoises and box turtles. Two wildlife 

sanctuaries, one on the east side of the 

island and one at the south end of the 

island, comprise about 97 acres and are 

closed to public use. Cooperative 

management agreements between the 

Service, the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), 

and the Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection entrust daily 

management activities of Egmont Key 

NWR to the Florida Park Service (FPS), 

which manages the island to protect and 

restore the historic structures and for 

swimming, sunbathing, shelling, and 

picnicking. 

Pinellas National Wildlife Refuge 

(NWR) was established in 1951 as a 

breeding ground for colonial bird 

species. It contains seven mangrove 

islands encompassing about 394 acres. 

The refuge is comprised of Little Bird, 

Mule, Jackass, Listen, and Whale Island 

Keys and leases Tarpon and Indian Keys 

from Pinellas County. A Pinellas County 

seagrass sanctuary is located around 

Tarpon and Indian Keys and the use of 

internal combustion engines within this 

zone is prohibited to protect seagrass 

beds. Hundreds of brown pelicans and 

double-crested cormorants and dozens 

of herons, egrets, and roseate spoonbills 

nest within Tarpon and Little Bird Keys. 

Pinellas NWR provides important 

mangrove habitat for most long-legged 

wading species, especially for reddish 

egrets. All of the mangrove islands of 

Pinellas NWR are closed to public use 

year-round to protect migratory birds. 

Passage Key National Wildlife Refuge 

(NWR) was originally designated as a 

Federal bird reservation by President 

Roosevelt in 1905, which then consisted 

of a 60-acre island with a freshwater 

lake and lush vegetation. However, 

erosion and hurricanes have virtually 

destroyed the key, and it is now a 

meandering sand bar varying in size 

from 0.5 to 10 acres, depending on 

weather. In 1970, Passage Key NWR was 

designated a Wilderness Area. The 

refuge’s objective is to provide habitat 

for colonial waterbirds. Hundreds of 

brown pelicans, laughing gulls, black 

skimmer, and royal terns, and small 

numbers of herons and egrets, nested 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Notices 18745 

annually until the island was destroyed 

by a hurricane in 2005. The key once 

hosted the largest royal tern and 

sandwich tern nesting colonies in the 

State of Florida. Because of its fragility, 

small size, and to protect the migratory 

birds that use the island, it is now 

closed to public use year-round. 

CCP Alternatives, Including Our 

Proposed Alternative 

We developed three alternatives for 

managing the refuges and chose 

Alternative B as the proposed 

alternative. A full description is in the 

Draft CCP/EA. We summarize each 

alternative below. 

Alternative A—No Action Alternative 

Under Alternative A, the no action 

alternative, management of the refuges 

would continue at the current level. The 

refuges would continue their primary 

mission of providing habitat for 

wildlife. Wildlife and habitat would be 

protected through a variety of 

management tools, such as area 

closures, predator control, law 

enforcement, exotic plant control, 

erosion control, and cleanup of trash. 

These activities (except for the closures) 

would be conducted on an 

opportunistic basis or under the 

direction and guidance of others. 

The refuges would continue to be 

managed by one full-time assistant 

refuge manager, with the support of 

nine staff members 100 miles away at 

the Chassahowitzka NWR. The refuges 

would continue to be assisted by 

numerous partners in opportunistically 

conducting bird and other wildlife 

surveys, educating visitors, and 

encouraging wildlife observation and 

photography. The Service would 

continue its cooperative management 

agreement with the FPS to manage 

Egmont Key NWR, with the State being 

responsible for most public recreation 

and interpretation of natural and 

cultural resources, and the Service being 

primarily responsible for the 

management of all wildlife and habitat. 

Meetings between the two agencies 

would continue to be held 

approximately twice a year. 

Under this alternative, the existing 

level of funding and staffing would be 

maintained. Accordingly, some 

positions would not be filled when 

vacated if funds needed to be 

reallocated to meet rising costs or new 

priorities. 

Alternative B—Proposed Alternative 

Under Alternative B, the proposed 

alternative, the Service would take more 

of a leadership role by coordinating 

and/or directing activities and decisions 

made by partners that have an impact 

on the refuges, including coordinating, 

directing, and conducting bird surveys 

and Atlantic loggerhead sea turtle 

surveys; coordinating additional bird 

surveys and monitoring and conducting 

research on the gopher tortoises of 

Egmont Key NWR; and, with partners, 

identifying, mapping, and protecting 

State-listed plant species on the refuges. 

The Service would promote and support 

increasing the Friends Group to more 

than 150 members. 

Under this alternative, Service staff 

dedicated to the Tampa Bay Refuges 

would be increased to four full-time 

permanent employees and one part-time 

permanent employee, which would 

include the addition of a law 

enforcement officer to increase 

protection of wildlife, habitat, and 

visitor safety; a biological technician to 

conduct bird surveys, predator and 

exotic species control, and beach 

renourishment activities; a public use 

specialist to facilitate and create 

opportunities for environmental 

education, interpretation, and wildlife 

observation and photography; and a 

part-time administrative assistant. 

Larger office space to accommodate the 

increased staff along with the Friends 

Group would be acquired, as well as 

facilities for boat storage and use; also, 

a Visitor Center would be established. 

The cooperative agreement with FPS 

to manage Egmont Key NWR would be 

enhanced under this alternative by 

establishing monthly communications 

and quarterly meetings. Further, the 

Service would facilitate the transfer of 

the USCG property on Egmont Key to 

the Service, and would establish the 

Service’s interest in the Pilots 

Compound property in the event the 

occupancy of that property changes. 

Acquisition of these lands would enable 

the Service to better conserve, protect, 

and manage the habitat on Egmont Key. 

Alternative C 

Under Alternative C, the Service 

would take on an even greater 

leadership role at the refuges, enhancing 

and expanding the activities proposed 

under Alternative B. The Service staff 

dedicated to the Tampa Bay Refuges 

would be increased to seven full-time 

permanent employees, including two 

law enforcement officers, one biological 

technician, one public use specialist, 

one maintenance person/equipment 

operator, and an administrative 

assistant. The Service would promote 

and support increasing the Friends 

Group to 200–300 members. Additional 

equipment and facilities would be 

acquired to support the staff and 

increased activities on the refuges. 

The additional staff members would 

allow the refuges to increase the 

frequency of some monitoring (e.g., 

piping plover); initiate bird research; 

routinely monitor and research gopher 

tortoises; enhance protection of wildlife, 

habitats, and visitor safety; control 

exotic and invasive vegetation on a 

routine basis; and provide educational 

events on a routine basis, including 

weekly interpretive tours using 

concessionaire(s) selected and operating 

under Service contract. 

Under this alternative, the Service 

would own and manage all of Egmont 

Key without sharing that responsibility 

with FPS—an overlay state park 

managed by FPS would no longer exist, 

allowing the Service to manage the 

island in a comprehensive manner. 

Next Step 

After the comment period ends, we 

will analyze the comments and address 

them. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment, including your 

personal identifying information, may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Authority: This notice is published under 

the authority of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement Act of 1997, Public 

Law 105–57. 

Dated: March 13, 2009. 

Cynthia K. Dohner, 

Acting Regional Director. 

[FR Doc. E9–9412 Filed 4–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND 

WATER COMMISSION, UNITED 

STATES AND MEXICO, UNITED 

STATES SECTION 

Notice of Availability of a Draft 

Environmental Assessment and Draft 

Finding of No Significant Impact for 

Flood Control Improvements to the 

Arroyo Colorado Floodway 

AGENCY: United States Section, 

International Boundary and Water 

Commission, United States and Mexico. 

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Draft 

Environmental Assessment (EA) and 

Draft Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI). 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES