Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 23 / Friday, February 4, 2005 / Notices 6031

Status of the proposed information 

collection: Currently approved.

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35, as amended.

Dated: January 26, 2005. 

John C. Weicher, 

Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal 

Housing Commissioner.

[FR Doc. 05–2214 Filed 2–3–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–27–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Bon Secour National Wildlife Refuge

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of the 

Draft Comprehensive Conservation 

Plan/Environmental Assessment for Bon 

Secour National Wildlife Refuge in 

Baldwin County, Alabama. 

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service 

announces that a Draft Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan/Environmental 

Assessment for Bon Secour National 

Wildlife Refuge is available for review 

and comment. The National Wildlife 

Refuge System Administration Act of 

1966, as amended by the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Improvement 

Act of 1997, requires the Service to 

develop a comprehensive conservation 

plan for each national wildlife refuge. 

The purpose in developing a 

comprehensive conservation plan is to 

provide refuge managers with a 15-year 

strategy for achieving refuge purposes 

and contributing toward the mission of 

the National Wildlife Refuge System, 

consistent with sound principles of fish 

and wildlife management, conservation, 

legal mandates, and Service policies. In 

addition to outlining broad management 

direction on conserving wildlife and 

their habitats, the plan identifies 

wildlife-dependent recreational 

opportunities available to the public, 

including opportunities for hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation and 

photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation. 

Proposed goals for the refuge include: 

• Identifying, conserving, managing, 

enhancing, and restoring populations of 

native fish and wildlife species 

representative of coastal Alabama, with 

special emphasis on migratory birds and 

threatened and endangered species. 

• Identifying, conserving, managing, 

enhancing, and restoring the natural 

diversity, abundance, and ecological 

functions of refuge habitats and 

associated plant communities, with an 

emphasis on managing designated 

critical habitat for threatened and 

endangered species. 

• Identifying and conserving 

archaeological and natural resources on 

the refuge and promoting conservation 

through interagency and private 

landowner cooperation, partnerships, 

and land protection programs on the 

Fort Morgan Peninsula and coastal 

Alabama. 

• Providing the public with quality 

interpretation, outreach opportunities, 

environmental education programs, and 

recreational activities that lead to a 

greater understanding, enjoyment, and 

appreciation of fish, wildlife, habitats, 

and cultural resources of coastal 

Alabama. 

Compatibility determinations for 

recreational fishing, wildlife 

observation, photography, hiking, 

environmental education and 

interpretation, swimming and beach 

use, scientific research, dogs on the 

beach, and bicycling are included in the 

draft plan. 

Proposed Action 

The proposed action is to adopt and 

implement a comprehensive 

conservation plan for the refuge that 

best achieves the refuge’s purpose, 

vision, and goals; contributes to the 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

mission; addresses the significant issues 

and relevant mandates; and is consistent 

with principles of sound fish and 

wildlife management. The Service 

analyzed four alternatives for managing 

the refuge and chose Alternative D as 

the one to best achieve all of these 

elements. 

Alternatives 

Alternative A—Represents the status 

quo; e.g., no changes from current 

management of the refuge. Existing 

refuge management and public outreach 

practices would be favored under this 

alternative. All refuge management 

actions would be directed towards 

achieving the refuge’s primary purposes 

including: (1) Preserving habitat to 

ensure the well-being of nationally 

threatened and endangered species; (2) 

conserving an undisturbed beach/dune 

ecosystem which includes a diversity of 

fish, wildlife, and their habitats; (3) 

serving as a living laboratory for 

scientists and students; and (4) 

providing wildlife-oriented recreation 

for the public.

Refuge management programs would 

continue to be developed and 

implemented with little baseline 

biological information. Active habitat 

management would include beach/dune 

habitat improvement and restoration, 

protection of nesting sea turtles, and 

prescribed burning designed to reduce 

fuel loads. Land would be acquired from 

willing sellers within the current 

acquisition boundary totaling 

approximately 12,570 acres. 

Fishing and wildlife observation 

would continue to be the major focuses 

of the refuge public use program, with 

no expansion of current opportunities. 

Current restrictions or prohibitions 

would remain. No new trails would be 

developed, but the refuge staff would 

continue to maintain the existing trails. 

Environmental education and 

interpretation and wildlife photography 

would be accommodated on a case-bycase basis. Funding to construct a 

maintenance facility and to rehabilitate 

existing facilities would be requested. 

Alternative B—Expands wildlife and 

habitat management activities, while 

maintaining current public use and 

education. Under this alternative, the 

emphasis would be to improve refuge 

resources for wildlife, while still 

maintaining those public use 

opportunities which presently exist. 

Most refuge management actions would 

be directed toward preserving, 

enhancing, restoring, and managing the 

beach/dune habitat for the benefit of the 

Alabama beach mouse and nesting sea 

turtles. Prescribed burning would be 

used to improve habitat for neotropical 

migratory birds. Other national, 

regional, and state goals to protect and 

restore forest, grassland, and scrub/

shrub bird populations would be 

supported secondarily in habitats that 

are inland from the beach/dune habitat. 

Baseline data would be collected, 

standardized surveys implemented, and 

populations monitored. 

Additional staff would include a 

biological technician and a law 

enforcement officer to accomplish 

objectives for establishing baseline data 

on refuge resources, managing habitats, 

and protecting biological resources. 

Under this alternative the refuge 

would continue to seek lands from 

willing sellers within the acquisition 

boundary. Non-traditional land 

protection methods would be developed 

and employed. 

Public uses would include wildlife 

observation and photography, limited 

interpretation, and fishing. Under this 

alternative, outreach and environmental 

education would occur on a sporadic, 

time-permitting basis. No evaluation of 

existing uses would occur. Fishing and 

wildlife observation would continue to 

be the major focus for the public use 

program, with no expansion of 

enhancement of current opportunities. 

No new trails would be developed, but 

the refuge staff would continue to 

maintain the existing trails. All new

6032 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 23 / Friday, February 4, 2005 / Notices 

funding would support the wildlife and 

habitat management programs, with 

annual maintenance funding to support 

upkeep of existing public use facilities. 

Partnership opportunities would not be 

feasible, as full attention would be on 

managing refuge lands and collecting 

biological information. This alternative 

in no way addresses the increase in 

visitation that has occurred in the past 

5 years and that is predicted to 

continue.

Alternative C—Maintains current 

wildlife and habitat management 

activities, while expanding public use 

and education. This approach would 

maintain the current wildlife and 

habitat management activities while 

allowing for significantly more public 

recreational uses. Additional staff 

needed to implement this alternative 

includes an outdoor recreation planner, 

a law enforcement officer, and a 

seasonal maintenance worker. Trails, 

parking lots, and interpretive signage 

would be constructed in every refuge 

unit, along with added environmental 

education and watchable wildlife 

programs. Additional staff would be 

used for developing and presenting both 

on- and off-site outreach and 

interpretation programs. A user fee and 

permit system would be implemented 

for fishing and beach use. A visitor 

center and headquarters office would be 

constructed on the refuge and would 

include an environmental education 

classroom and meeting facilities. 

Land acquisition within the current 

acquisition boundary would continue 

with emphasis on those lands that can 

provide additional public use 

opportunities and beach access. 

Sporadic beach mouse live-trapping 

and monitoring of sea turtle nests on 

refuge beaches would continue. No new 

surveys on migratory songbirds, 

breeding songbirds, shorebirds and 

marshbirds, and wintering shorebirds 

would occur. Baseline data on 

herpetofauna would not be collected. 

Only dune restoration habitat projects 

would occur. Grassland and scrub/shrub 

habitat would not be restored and 

managed and prescribed fire would 

continue to focus on fuel reduction 

versus enhancing bird habitats. All new 

partnerships would be related to visitor 

services, public outreach, and 

environmental education. 

Alternative D—Expands wildlife and 

habitat management activities, while 

optimizing public use and involvement. 

The Service planning team has 

identified Alternative D as the preferred 

alternative. This alternative was 

developed based on public input and 

the best judgment of the planning team. 

The strategies presented in the draft 

plan were developed as a direct result 

of the selection of Alternative D. 

This alternative would promote a 

greater understanding and protection of 

fish, wildlife, and their habitats, and 

higher quality, balanced recreational 

opportunities for visitors. Fishing would 

continue with greater emphasis on the 

quality of the experience. Education and 

interpretation would be promoted 

through regular programs and 

partnerships with local schools. 

Wildlife observation and photography 

opportunities would be expanded, 

including a kayak trail and observation 

towers, highlighting refuge management 

programs and unique wildlife habitats. 

A user fee and permit would be 

implemented to facilitate night fishing 

at Mobile Point. A visitor center and 

headquarters office would be 

constructed on the refuge with space for 

interpretation, environmental 

education, and staff. 

Research studies on the refuge would 

be fostered and partnerships developed 

with other agencies and universities to 

provide needed resources and 

experiment sites, while meeting the 

needs of the refuge’s wildlife and 

habitat management programs. Research 

would also benefit conservation efforts 

throughout the Central Gulf Coast to 

preserve, enhance, restore, and manage 

coastal barrier island habitat. New 

surveys on birds, reptiles, and 

amphibians would be initiated to 

develop baseline information.

Additional staff would include both 

biological and outreach personnel. A 

biological technician, outdoor recreation 

planner, seasonal maintenance worker, 

and full-time law enforcement officer 

would be added to accomplish 

objectives for establishing baseline data 

on refuge resources, managing habitats, 

providing opportunities and facilities 

for wildlife observation and 

photography, providing educational 

programs that promote a greater 

understanding of refuge resources, and 

protecting natural and cultural 

resources and refuge visitors. 

Under this alternative, the refuge 

would continue to seek acquisition of 

all lands within the present acquisition 

boundary. Lands acquired as part of the 

refuge would be made available for 

compatible wildlife-dependent public 

recreation and environmental education 

opportunities, where appropriate. 

Pristine lands that provide high quality 

habitat and connectivity to existing 

refuge lands would be priority 

acquisitions. Equally important 

acquisition tools to be used include: 

transfer lands, partnerships with 

conservation organizations, 

conservation easements with adjacent 

landowners, and leases/cooperative 

agreements with state agencies. 

Actions Common to All Alternatives 

All three alternatives share the 

following management concepts and 

techniques for achieving the goals of the 

refuge: 

• Restoring native habitats; 

• Establishing, maintaining, and 

improving partnerships with 

landowners and local, state, and federal 

agencies and organizations; 

• Coordinating management actions 

with local and state land and resource 

management agencies; 

• Monitoring Alabama beach mouse 

populations and sea turtle nesting in 

partnership with others; 

• Removing non-native invasive 

plants; 

• Encouraging scientific research on 

the refuge; and 

• Continuing land acquisition within 

the refuge boundary.

DATES: A meeting will be held at the 

Gulf Shores Adult Activities Center to 

present the plan to the public. Mailings, 

newspaper articles, and postings on the 

refuge Web site will be the avenues to 

inform the public of the date and time 

for this meeting. Individuals wishing to 

comment on the Draft Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan/Environmental 

Assessment for Bon Secour National 

Wildlife Refuge should do so within 30 

days following the date of this notice. 

Public comments were requested, 

considered, and incorporated 

throughout the planning process in 

numerous ways. Public outreach has 

included public scoping meetings, 

technical workgroups, planning 

updates, and a Federal Register notice.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the 

Draft Comprehensive Conservation 

Plan/Environmental Assessment should 

be addressed to Robert Cail, Refuge 

Manager, Bon Secour National Wildlife 

Refuge, 12295 State Highway 180, Gulf 

Shores, Alabama 36542. Comments on 

the draft may be submitted to the above 

address or via electronic mail to 

bonsecour@fws.gov. Please include your 

name and return address in your 

Internet message. Our practice is to 

make comments, including names and 

home addresses of respondents, 

available for public review during 

regular business hours. Individual 

respondents may request that we 

withhold their home addresses from the 

record, which we will honor to the 

extent allowable by law.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Bon 

Secour National Wildlife Refuge is 

located on the Gulf Coast of Alabama, 8 

miles west of the city of Gulf Shores, 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 23 / Friday, February 4, 2005 / Notices 6033

Alabama, in Baldwin and Mobile 

Counties. The refuge is divided into five 

separate management units along the 

Fort Morgan Peninsula and Little 

Dauphin Island. Although the refuge 

was established in 1980, to date, only 

6,978 acres have been acquired within 

the acquisition boundary totaling 

approximately 12,570 acres, including 

the 575 acres leased from the State of 

Alabama. The Service has management 

jurisdiction along the shoreline above 

mean high tide except on Little Dauphin 

Island, which contains 560 acres of 

submerged bottoms. The potential 

wildlife habitat values of beach/dune, 

maritime forest, and estuarine habitats 

provided the impetus to purchase the 

properties. 

Management efforts since 1985 have 

emphasized acquiring land, securing 

staff to operate the refuge, and initiating 

conservation programs that benefit 

endangered wildlife species. However, 

Service acquisition of key properties, 

such as inholdings and beach/dune 

habitat, may not be realized within the 

15-year planning period due to budget 

constraints and landowner preferences. 

The five units within the acquisition 

boundary have a significant ‘‘edge,’’

which contributes to the predation of 

birds, sea turtles, and beach mice. Edge 

effect is the tendency of a transitional 

zone between communities to support 

more species and higher population 

densities than any of the surrounding 

communities. 

Current conservation management 

projects for the refuge include: 

recruiting and training staff and 

improving existing facilities; managing 

habitats to reduce the threats and 

problems associated with species of 

concern; acquiring land to complete 

refuge boundaries; assisting in sea turtle 

and Alabama beach mouse recovery; 

and defining research within the beach/

dune area and involving partners and 

volunteers to accomplish this research.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Cail, Refuge Manager, Bon 

Secour National Wildlife Refuge, 

telephone: 251/540–7720; fax: 251/540–

7301, or mail (write to Refuge Manager 

at address in ADDRESSES section).

Authority: This notice is published under 

the authority of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement Act of 1997, Pub. L. 

105–57.

Dated: January 6, 2005. 

Cynthia K. Dohner, 

Acting Regional Director.

[FR Doc. 05–2182 Filed 2–3–02; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Preparation of an Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Joint Water 

Agency Natural Communities 

Conservation Plan (NCCP): 

Subregional Plan and Subarea Plans, 

San Diego, CA

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) 

advises the public that we intend to 

gather information necessary to prepare, 

in coordination with the Joint Water 

Agency (consisting of Helix Water 

District, Padre Dam Municipal Water 

District, Santa Fe Irrigation District, and 

the Sweetwater Authority) (hereafter 

collectively referred to as the 

Applicants), a joint Environmental 

Impact Statement/Environmental 

Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for a Natural 

Communities Conservation Program 

Subregional Plan (SRP) and three 

Subarea Plans (SAPs). The combination 

of the Joint Water Agency SRP and 

individual SAPs would serve as a 

multiple species Habitat Conservation 

Plan under Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the 

Federal Endangered Species Act, as 

amended in 1982 (ESA). 

The Service provides this notice to: 

(1) Describe the proposed action and 

possible alternatives; (2) advise other 

Federal and State agencies, affected 

Tribes, and the public of our intent to 

prepare an EIS/EIR; (3) announce the 

initiation of a public scoping period; 

and (4) obtain suggestions and 

information on the scope of issues and 

alternatives to be included in the EIS/

EIR.

DATES: Public scoping meetings will be 

held on: Tuesday, February 8, 2005 from 

4 p.m. to 7 p.m. and Wednesday, 

February 9, 2005 from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. 

Written comments should be received 

on or before March 7, 2005.

ADDRESSES: The public meetings will be 

held at the following locations: (1) 

Tuesday, February 8, 2005, at the 

Sweetwater Authority Reynolds 

Desalination Facility, 3066 North 

Second Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91912; 

and (2) Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at 

the Padre Dam Municipal Water District 

Board Room, 10887 Woodside Avenue, 

Santee, CA 92072. 

Information, written comments, or 

questions related to the preparation of 

the EIS/EIR and NEPA process should 

be submitted to Erin Fernandez, Fish 

and Wildlife Biologist, Carlsbad Fish 

and Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley 

Road, Carlsbad, California 92009 

(facsimile 760–431–5902).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin 

Fernandez at (760) 431–9440.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Reasonable Accommodation 

Persons needing reasonable 

accommodations in order to attend and 

participate in the public meeting should 

contact Erin Fernandez as soon as 

possible (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT). In order to allow sufficient 

time to process requests, please call no 

later than 1 week before the public 

meeting. Information regarding this 

proposed action is available in 

alternative formats upon request. 

Background 

Section 9 of the Federal ESA (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and Federal 

regulations prohibit the ‘‘take’’ of a fish 

or wildlife species listed as endangered 

or threatened. Under the ESA, the 

following activities are defined as take: 

harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 

wound, kill, trap, capture or collect 

listed animal species, or attempt to 

engage in such conduct (16 U.S.C. 

1538). However, under section 10(a) of 

the ESA, we may issue permits to 

authorize ‘‘incidental take’’ of listed 

species. ‘‘Incidental take’’ is defined by 

the ESA as take that is incidental to, and 

not the purpose of, carrying out an 

otherwise lawful activity. Regulations 

governing permits for threatened species 

and endangered species, respectively, 

are at 50 CFR 17.32 and 50 CFR 17.22. 

Take of listed plant species is not 

prohibited under the ESA and cannot be 

authorized under a section 10 permit. 

We propose to include plant species on 

the permit in recognition of the 

conservation benefits provided for them 

under the plan. 

The purpose of the EIS/EIR is to 

analyze the impacts of the proposed 

implementation of the SRP and three 

SAPs. The Federal need for the SRP and 

three SAPs is to meet the criteria for 

incidental take authorization of species 

on the covered species list. 

The proposed SRP would 

comprehensively address how 

participating water agencies will 

manage their lands to conserve natural 

habitats and species while continuing to 

provide their mandated water services 

to the public. The proposed SRP would 

serve as an ‘‘umbrella document’’ to 

guide the preparation of Natural 

Communities Conservation Program 

subarea plans by each participating 

water agency. The combination of the