30052 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Notices 

Containing approximately 8,753 acres. 

T. 10 N., R. 17 E., 

Secs. 9, 10, and 11; 

Secs. 14 to 23; 

Sec. 29. 

Containing approximately 8,750 acres. 

T. 12 N., R. 17 E., 

Secs. 33 and 34. 

Containing approximately 1,280 acres. 

Aggregating approximately 18,783 acres. 

Notice of the decision will also be 

published four times in the Fairbanks 

Daily News-Miner. 

DATES: The time limits for filing an 

appeal are: 

1. Any party claiming a property 

interest which is adversely affected by 

the decision shall have until June 28, 

2010 to file an appeal. 

2. Parties receiving service of the 

decision by certified mail shall have 30 

days from the date of receipt to file an 

appeal. 

Parties who do not file an appeal in 

accordance with the requirements of 43 

CFR part 4, subpart E, shall be deemed 

to have waived their rights. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of the decision may 

be obtained from: Bureau of Land 

Management, Alaska State Office, 222 

West Seventh Avenue, #13, Anchorage, 

Alaska 99513–7504. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

BLM by phone at 907–271–5960, or by 

e-mail at 

ak.blm.conveyance@ak.blm.gov. Persons 

who use a telecommunication device 

(TTD) may contact the BLM by calling 

the Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339, 24 hours a 

day, 7 days a week. 

Jason Robinson, 

Land Law Examiner, Land Transfer 

Adjudication II Branch. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12840 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–JA–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R5–R–2009–N185; BAC–4311–K9–S3] 

Nomans Land Island National Wildlife 

Refuge, Town of Chilmark, MA 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability of draft 

comprehensive conservation plan and 

environmental assessment; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of the draft comprehensive 

conservation plan (CCP) and draft 

environmental assessment (EA) for 

Nomans Land Island National Wildlife 

Refuge (NWR) for a 30-day public 

review and comment period. In this 

draft CCP/EA, we describe three 

alternatives, including our Servicepreferred Alternative C, for managing 

this refuge for the next 15 years. Also 

available for public review and 

comment is the draft wilderness review, 

which is included as Appendix C in the 

draft CCP/EA. 

DATES: To ensure our consideration of 

your written comments, please send 

them by June 28, 2010. We will also 

hold at least one public meeting in 

Chilmark, Massachusetts, during the 30- 

day review period to receive comments 

and provide information on the draft 

plan. We will announce and post details 

about public meetings in local news 

media, via our project mailing list, and 

on our regional planning Web site, 

http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/ 

nomansland/ccphome.html. 

ADDRESSES: Send your comments or 

requests for more information by any of 

the following methods. 

Agency Web site: View or download 

the draft document at http:// 

www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/ 

nomansland/ccphome.html. 

Electronic mail: 

northeastplanning@fws.gov. Include 

‘‘Nomans Land Island NWR CCP/EA’’ in 

the subject line of the message. 

U.S. Postal Service: Eastern 

Massachusetts NWR Complex, 73 Weir 

Hill Road, Sudbury, MA 01776. 

In-Person Drop-off, Viewing, or 

Pickup: Call 978–443–4661 to make an 

appointment during regular business 

hours at the above address. 

Facsimile: Attn: Carl Melberg, 978– 

443–2898. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl 

Melberg, Planning Team Leader, at 978– 

443–4661 extension 32. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

With this notice, we continue the CCP 

process for Nomans Land Island NWR 

in Chilmark, Massachusetts, which we 

started with the notice of intent (NOI) 

that was published in the Federal 

Register (73 FR 76376) on December 16, 

2008. We prepared the draft CCP in 

compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (NEPA) and the 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee), as amended by the 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1997 (Act). This 

refuge is one of eight refuges in the 

Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex. 

Nomans Land Island NWR is a 628- 

acre roadless island located 

approximately 3 miles south of Martha’s 

Vineyard, Massachusetts. It was 

established for the conservation and 

management of migratory birds. The 

Service first began managing a portion 

of the eastern side of the island in 1975 

as an ‘‘overlay’’ refuge under a Joint 

Management Agreement between the 

U.S. Department of the Interior and the 

U.S. Department of the Navy (DoN), 

while it was still under DoN ownership. 

In 1998, management responsibility for 

the island was transferred to the Service 

and became Nomans Land Island NWR. 

This island has a unique history, from 

use by Native Americans as a summer 

camp, to sheep grazing when the island 

was privately owned in the 1800s, to 

use as a bombing range to train DoN 

pilots during and after World War II. 

The refuge provides diverse habitats 

that include intertidal, freshwater 

wetland, grassland and shrubland 

habitats, and serves an important role 

for nesting landbirds and colonial 

waterbirds and as a stopover habitat for 

migratory birds and raptors such as the 

peregrine falcon. 

Public access has never been allowed 

on the refuge due to unexploded 

ordnance (UXO), therefore, none of the 

six priority uses of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System (NWRS) established by 

Congress in the Act occur on the island. 

Off-site interpretation opportunities 

exist with potential partners such as the 

Town of Chilmark, the Wampanoag 

Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) (the 

Tribe), and the Aquinnah Cultural 

Center. 

Background 

The CCP Process 

The Act requires us to develop a CCP 

for each national wildlife refuge. The 

purpose for developing CCPs is to 

provide refuge managers with 15-year 

plans for achieving refuge purposes and 

the mission of the NWRS, in 

conformance 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 priority wildlife-dependent 

recreational opportunities available to 

the public, including opportunities for 

hunting, fishing, wildlife observation 

and photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation. We will 

review and update each CCP at least 

every 15 years, in accordance with the 

Act. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Notices 30053 

The Wilderness Review 

Service planning policy (602 FW 3) 

requires that we conduct a wilderness 

review in association with the 

development of a refuge CCP, pursuant 

to the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et 

seq.). The purpose of the wilderness 

review is to identify and describe 

wilderness values and evaluate 

appropriate management alternatives. 

The wilderness review process has three 

phases: Inventory, study, and 

recommendation. After first identifying 

lands and waters that meet the 

minimum criteria for wilderness during 

the inventory phase, the resulting 

wilderness study areas (WSAs) are 

further evaluated to determine if they 

merit recommendation from the Service 

to the Secretary of the Interior 

(Secretary) for inclusion in the National 

Wilderness Preservation System 

(NWPS). 

Public Outreach 

There is a long planning history for 

this CCP. On February 24, 1999, a NOI 

to prepare a CCP and environmental 

impact statement (EIS) for what was 

then known as Great Meadows NWR 

Complex, of which Nomans Land Island 

NWR is a part, was printed in the 

Federal Register. In 2001, we 

determined it was not feasible to 

prepare one plan for eight refuges, and 

on February 15, 2001, another notice 

was printed in the Federal Register 

indicating that a CCP/EIS would be 

prepared for Monomoy, Nantucket, and 

Nomans Land Island NWRs. However, 

no work was done on those plans at that 

time. On December 13, 2004, another 

NOI was printed in the Federal Register 

to indicate that the planning process for 

Nomans Land Island NWR and 

Monomoy NWR was being re-initiated, 

and that comments already received 

under previous notices would be 

considered. In 2008, because of the 

different issues facing the refuges, the 

Service determined it to be more 

efficient to proceed separately with the 

Nomans Land Island NWR CCP/EA. 

Scoping began in 1999 with public 

meetings and the solicitation of public 

comments via planning workbooks. In 

April 2005, two scoping meetings were 

held in Chilmark, Massachusetts. 

Interagency, stakeholder, and public 

scoping was re-initiated through partner 

and public meetings held on October 14, 

2008, at the Chilmark Library, followed 

by a comment period ending November 

14, 2008. Federal and State natural 

resource agency staff, current and 

potential refuge partners, and members 

of the general public attended these 

meetings. During these meetings, we 

asked attendees specific questions about 

their views on the refuge’s wildlife and 

habitat values, how they view the 

refuge, and their suggestions for future 

refuge management. 

Some of the key issues we identified 

were the management of migratory birds 

and their habitats including shrubland, 

rocky shoreline and wetlands, 

coordination with the DoN to ensure 

safety, UXO removal, enforcement of no 

public access, better communication 

with the public about the refuge and our 

management activities, and protection 

of cultural resources. 

CCP Alternatives, Including Selected 

Alternative 

We developed three management 

alternatives based on the purposes for 

establishing the refuge, its vision and 

goals, and the issues and concerns 

identified by the public, State agencies, 

the Tribe, and the Service during the 

planning process. The alternatives have 

some actions in common, such as 

protecting and monitoring fish and 

wildlife species, managing the extensive 

shrubland habitat, controlling invasive 

plants and wildlife diseases, protecting 

cultural resources, planning for limited 

Tribal use of the island, developing a 

partnership agreement with the Tribe, 

maintaining a no public use policy, and 

distributing refuge revenue sharing 

payments to the Town of Chilmark. 

Other actions distinguish the 

alternatives. The draft CCP/EA describes 

the alternatives in detail, and relates 

them to the issues and concerns 

identified. Highlights are as follows: 

Alternative A (Current Management) 

This alternative is the ‘‘No Action’’ 

alternative required by NEPA. 

Alternative A defines our current 

management activities, and serves as the 

baseline against which to compare the 

other alternatives. Our current habitat 

management focuses on allowing 

natural processes and prescribed burns 

conducted by the DoN for UXO removal 

operations to maintain the diversity of 

the maritime shrubland habitat that 

supports migratory and nesting birds of 

conservation concern such as the 

eastern towhee and gray catbird. Other 

than some invasive species 

management, only natural processes 

affect the ponds and wetlands on the 

refuge that provide important breeding 

habitat for Virginia rail and other 

species of conservation concern. 

We would continue to maintain the 

15 acres of herbaceous upland and 100 

acres of intertidal beach and rocky shore 

to provide suitable habitat conditions 

for nesting American oystercatcher, 

piping plover, and terns, as well as 

other shorebird, colonial waterbird, and 

seabird species identified as species of 

conservation concern. We would 

continue to enforce the no public access 

policy along the shoreline to prevent 

public use activities that may pose 

safety risks due to UXO. 

We would continue to work with our 

partners to monitor these habitats for 

invasive plants and disease, and we 

would treat the vegetation to fight 

invasive species if we have available 

funding and staffing. Our biological 

monitoring and inventory program and 

habitat and trail management would 

continue at its current minimal level, 

and would be limited by safety concerns 

and UXO removal conducted by the 

DoN. 

We would continue to protect cultural 

resources by strengthening our 

relationships with the Tribe and the 

Chilmark Historical Commission. We 

would consult with the DoN Regional 

Archeologist prior to any grounddisturbing activities. 

Our visitor services programs would 

not change, as minimal off-site 

interpretation now occurs via our Web 

site and virtual tour. Our staffing and 

facilities would remain the same. 

Existing staff for the refuge complex 

would remain in place, and the 

headquarters would remain at the 

Sudbury, Massachusetts office. No new 

staff would be hired specifically for this 

refuge. 

Alternative B (Enhanced Management 

and Habitat Diversity) 

In this alternative, the Service takes a 

more active role in managing habitats, 

research, monitoring, and inventorying 

its priority natural and cultural 

resources. 

We would coordinate with the DoN 

on all management activities and 

provide additional trails for monitoring 

and management access throughout the 

island. Under this alternative, we would 

establish a fire-based management 

regime with prescribed burns to 

maintain 400 acres of desired shrubland 

habitat conditions in order to support 

focal nesting bird species and provide 

critical shrubland stop-over habitat for 

migrating landbirds and butterflies. We 

would also explore the potential to 

introduce the New England cottontail 

on the refuge in support of regional 

recovery efforts for this species of State 

and regional conservation concern. 

We would manage the 15 acres of 

herbaceous upland vegetation that 

provides habitat for shorebirds and 

terns, and the 100 acres of marine 

intertidal beach and rocky shore 

habitats to benefit marine mammals and 

nesting and migrating shorebirds. We 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
30054 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Notices 

would manage the 100 to 150 acres of 

freshwater wetland communities to 

support breeding marsh birds and native 

plant and animal communities, and 

control non-native invasive species and 

predators as necessary to support 

nesting focal species of conservation 

concern. We would create a habitat map 

for the refuge, and conduct inventories, 

research, and monitoring on rare and 

special concern species. 

Since no public use is allowed, we 

would increase visitor services 

programming off-site with 

environmental education and 

interpretation by developing 

partnerships with the Tribe, Town of 

Chilmark, and the Aquinnah Cultural 

Center. We would work with partners to 

conduct shoreline surveys for 

archeological resources at risk from 

erosion and develop protocols for 

collection and repository of artifacts and 

remains. 

We would increase refuge complex 

staff by three new positions—Biological, 

Visitor Services, and Law Enforcement. 

Under this alternative, we would focus 

on strengthening partnerships with the 

Tribe for ceremonial access. We would 

also increase access and management 

throughout the refuge with the 

cooperation of the DoN. 

Alternative C (Natural Processes 

Emphasis-Service Preferred Alternative) 

This alternative is the one we propose 

as the best way to manage this refuge 

over the next 15 years. It includes an 

array of less active management actions 

that, in our professional judgment, 

works best toward achieving the refuge 

purposes, our vision and goals, and the 

goals of other State and regional 

conservation plans. We also believe it 

most effectively addresses the key issues 

that arose during the planning process. 

Lastly, it is the most realistic, given the 

relatively modest increase in staffing 

and funding that is anticipated over the 

next 15 years. 

This alternative acknowledges that 

the refuge meets the minimum criteria 

for a WSA. Under this alternative, a 

Nomans Land Island WSA would be 

recommended as suitable for 

designation and inclusion in the NWPS. 

The analysis of environmental 

consequences is based on the 

assumption that Congress would accept 

the recommendation and designate 

Nomans Land Island NWR as 

wilderness. The Nomans Land Island 

WSA would be managed according to 

the provisions of the Wilderness Act 

and Service Wilderness Stewardship 

Policy (610 FW 1–3). The wilderness 

area would be managed to accomplish 

refuge purposes and the NWRS mission, 

while also preserving wilderness 

character and natural values for future 

generations. Use of motorized vehicles, 

motorized equipment, mechanical 

transport on the island would be 

allowed for emergency purposes, and 

when necessary to meet minimum 

requirements for the administration of 

the area as wilderness, and to 

accomplish refuge purposes. The island 

would continue to be accessible by 

motorboat. 

The information and analyses in the 

CCP/EA would be used to compile a 

wilderness study report and legislative 

EIS to accompany the wilderness 

recommendation. Since Congress has 

reserved the authority to make final 

decisions on wilderness designation, the 

wilderness recommendation is a 

preliminary administrative 

determination that would receive 

further review and possible 

modification by the Director, the 

Secretary, or the President. We would 

conduct some survey, inventory, 

research, and monitoring of focal 

species such as common and roseate 

terns, and would implement necessary 

measures to protect any colonies larger 

than 50 pairs. We would work with 

partners on specific priority efforts, 

such as analyzing the feasibility of New 

England cottontail introduction. We 

would track vegetation changes and 

invasive species, and control those that 

threaten healthy ecosystems. Under 

Alternative C, we would primarily allow 

coastal processes of wind and wave 

action to shape the refuge habitats, but 

would consider using fire to maintain 

shrubland stopover habitat for migratory 

birds, if necessary. We would focus our 

efforts to provide quality habitat on the 

refuge for landbirds, including raptors, 

during fall migration. 

This alternative resembles Alternative 

A in its minimal management approach, 

refuge administration, and facilities. We 

would provide oversight and 

coordination to the DoN contaminant 

and UXO cleanup, pursue a partnership 

agreement with the Tribe that provides, 

in part, access to the refuge for 

ceremonial purposes, and work with 

partners on cultural resource protection. 

As with Alternative B, we would 

enhance visitor services to provide 

additional off-site opportunities for 

interpretation and communication, 

since no public access is allowed on the 

refuge. Staffing would remain the same 

as in Alternative A. 

Public Meetings 

The public will have the opportunity 

to provide input at one public meeting 

in Chilmark, Massachusetts. We will 

release mailings, news releases, and 

announcements electronically and 

provide information about opportunities 

for public review and comment on our 

Web site and in local newspapers with 

the contact information below. You can 

obtain the schedule from the planning 

team leader or project leader (see 

ADDRESSES). You may also submit 

comments anytime during the planning 

process by mail, electronic mail, or 

facsimile (SEE ADDRESSES). For specific 

information, including dates, times, and 

locations, contact the planning team 

leader (see ADDRESSES) or visit our Web 

site at http://www.fws.gov/northeast/ 

planning/nomansland/ccphome.html. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, electronic mail address, or 

other personal identifying information 

in your comments, you should be aware 

that your entire comment—including 

your personal identifying information— 

may be made available to the public 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. 

Dated: April 26, 2010. 

James G. Geiger, 

Acting Regional Director, Northeast Region, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Hadley, 

Massachusetts. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12669 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[LLWY930000 L16100000.DS0000] 

Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement and 

Resource Management Plan 

Amendments for the Casper, 

Kemmerer, Pinedale, Rock Springs, 

Newcastle, and Rawlins Field Offices, 

WY 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Intent. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) of 1969, as amended, and the 

Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act of 1976, as amended, the Bureau of 

Land Management (BLM) Wyoming 

State Office intends to prepare Resource 

Management Plan (RMP) amendments 

with an associated Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) for the Casper, 

Kemmerer, Pinedale, Rock Springs, 

Newcastle, and Rawlins Resource 

Management Plans (RMPs) and by this 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES