Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 1, 2010 / Notices 30425 

development, we anticipate a greater 

need for monitoring and control of 

invasive plants. We would also 

encourage additional research that 

would assess whether increased public 

use affects wildlife behavior, including 

nesting, feeding, and resting. We 

therefore propose in this alternative to 

have a staff of 13.5, compared to a staff 

of 12.5 in alternative B. 

Within the biological objectives, 

differences are more subtle and 

emphasize early successional habitat 

management over forest stand 

improvement. Although the Biological 

Integrity and Diversity Policy would 

still guide some management of the 

forested and unique wetland plant 

communities, this management would 

mostly be in the form of protection and 

conservation rather than restoration. 

The Research Natural Area in this 

alternative would be 593 acres, 

compared with 754 acres in alternative 

B. 

Alternative D (Emphasis on Managing 

for Historic Habitats) 

This alternative strives to establish 

and maintain the ecological integrity of 

natural communities within the refuge. 

Management would range from passive, 

or ‘‘letting nature takes its course,’’ to 

actively manipulating vegetation to 

create or hasten the development of 

mature forest structural conditions 

shaped by natural disturbances such as 

infrequent fires, ice storms, and small 

patch blow-downs. Under this 

alternative, no particular wildlife 

species would be a management focus. 

We would pursue wetland restoration 

projects where past land uses have 

altered historical plant communities or 

have hindered natural hydrological 

flow. We would also promote research 

and development of applied 

management practices to sustain and 

enhance the natural composition, 

patterns, and processes within their 

natural range in the Central 

Appalachian Forest. As in the other 

alternatives, we would ensure 

protection of current or future 

threatened and endangered species, and 

we would control the establishment and 

spread of non-native, invasive species. 

We would create the same 754-acre 

Research Natural Area as we would in 

alternative B. 

In alternative D, we would limit new 

visitor services infrastructure to alreadydisturbed areas, such as around the 

refuge headquarters and visitor center 

facility, the Freeland tract, and roadside 

pullouts along A-frame Road. We would 

enhance hunting and fishing 

opportunities in ways similar to 

alternatives B and C. Under this 

alternative, we would expect a 10 

percent increase in visitor use, which is 

the same as alternative A. To fully 

implement this alternative, we would 

add 2.5 positions to the Canaan Valley 

staff for a total of 11.5 positions. One of 

these would be a law enforcement 

officer to help enforce stricter 

limitations on visitor use. 

Public Meetings 

We will give the public opportunities 

to provide input at public comment 

meetings. You can obtain the schedule 

from the project leader or natural 

resource planner (see ADDRESSES or FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above). 

You may also submit comments at any 

time during the planning process, by 

any means shown in the ADDRESSES

section. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-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 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. 

Dated: April 26, 2010. 

James G. Geiger, 

Acting Regional Director, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Hadley, MA. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12998 Filed 5–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R2–ES–2010–N100; 20124–1113– 

0000–F5] 

Endangered and Threatened Species 

Permit Applications 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of receipt of applications; 

request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: The following applicants have 

applied for scientific research permits to 

conduct certain activities with 

endangered species under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). The Act requires that we 

invite public comment on these permit 

applications. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, written 

comments must be received on or before 

July 1, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be submitted to the Chief, Endangered 

Species Division, Ecological Services, 

P.O. Box 1306, Room 6034, 

Albuquerque, NM 87103. Documents 

and other information submitted with 

these applications are available for 

review, subject to the requirements of 

the Privacy Act and Freedom of 

Information Act. Documents will be 

available for public inspection, by 

appointment only, during normal 

business hours at the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 500 Gold Ave., SW., 

Room 6034, Albuquerque, NM. Please 

refer to the respective permit number for 

each application when submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susan Jacobsen, Chief, Endangered 

Species Division, P.O. Box 1306, 

Albuquerque, NM 87103; (505) 248– 

6920. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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. 

Permit TE–02368A 

Applicant: Andrea Chavez, 

Albuquerque, New Mexico. 

Applicant requests a new permit for 

research and recovery purposes to 

conduct presence/absence surveys for 

southwestern willow flycatcher 

(Empidonax taillii extimus) within New 

Mexico. 

Permit TE–172278 

Applicant: John Abbott, Austin, Texas. 

Applicant requests an amendment to 

a current permit for research and 

recovery purposes to conduct presence/ 

absence surveys and genetic sampling 

for American burying beetle 

(Nicrophorus americanus) within 

Oklahoma. 

Permit TE–10794A 

Applicant: Robert Steidl, Tucson, 

Arizona. 

Applicant requests a new permit for 

research and recovery purposes to 

conduct presence/absence surveys for 

lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris 

yerbabuenae) within Arizona. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
30426 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 1, 2010 / Notices 

Permit TE–10808A 

Applicant: Sorola Natural Resources 

Consulting, LLC, Del Rio, Texas. 

Applicant requests a new permit for 

research and recovery purposes to 

conduct presence/absence surveys for 

golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica 

chrysoparia), black-capped vireo (Vireo 

atricapilla), Tobusch fishhook cactus 

(Sclerocactus brevihaatus tobuschii), 

and Texas snowbells (Styrax 

platanifolius) within Texas. 

Permit TE–021340 

Applicant: HDR Engineering, Phoenix, 

Arizona. 

Applicant requests an amendment to 

a current permit for research and 

recovery purposes to conduct presence/ 

absence surveys for southwestern 

willow flycatcher (Empidonax taillii 

extimus) within Texas. 

Permit TE–11152A 

Applicant: Fort Defiance Branch of 

Natural Resources, Fort Defiance, 

Arizona. 

Applicant requests a new permit for 

research and recovery purposes to 

conduct presence/absence surveys for 

southwestern willow flycatcher 

(Empidonax taillii extimus) within 

Arizona and New Mexico. 

Permit TE–212896 

Applicant: University of Florida, 

Gainesville, Florida. 

Applicant requests an amendment to 

a current permit to allow lethal take of 

a limited number of humpback chub 

(Gila cypha) within Arizona. 

Permit TE–001623 

Applicant: American Southwest 

Ichthyological Researchers, LLC, 

Albuquerque, New Mexico. 

Applicant requests an amendment to 

their current permit to conduct 

population monitoring, spawning 

activities, and downstream transport 

studies for Colorado pikeminnow 

(Ptychochelius lucius) and razorback 

sucker (Xyrauchen texanus) in the San 

Juan River Basin, New Mexico. 

Permit TE–13192A 

Applicant: AMEC Earth and 

Environmental, Inc., Albuquerque, 

New Mexico. 

Applicant requests a new permit for 

research and recovery purposes to 

monitor the Alamosa springsnail 

(Tryonia alamosae) in Socorro County, 

New Mexico. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

Dated: May 21, 2010. 

Thomas L. Bauer, 

Regional Director, Southwest Region, Fish 

and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13013 Filed 5–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[WY–930–1610–DR] 

Notice of Availability of Record of 

Decision for the Kemmerer Resource 

Management Plan/Environmental 

Impact Statement 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Availability. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) announces the 

availability of the Record of Decision 

(ROD)/Approved Resource Management 

Plan (RMP) for the Kemmerer Field 

Office planning area located in Lincoln, 

Sweetwater, and Uinta counties, 

Wyoming. The Wyoming State Director 

signed the ROD on May 24, 2010, which 

constitutes the final decision of the BLM 

and makes the Approved RMP effective 

immediately. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the ROD/ 

Approved RMP are available upon 

request from the Field Manager, 

Kemmerer Field Office, Bureau of Land 

Management, 312 Highway 189 North, 

Kemmerer, Wyoming 83101; from the 

Wyoming State Office, Bureau of Land 

Management, 5353 Yellowstone Road, 

Cheyenne, Wyoming 82003; or via the 

Internet at: http://www.blm.gov/rmp/ 

kemmerer/docs.htm. Copies of the ROD/ 

Approved RMP are available for public 

inspection at the addresses listed above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information, contact John 

Christensen, Kemmerer Field Manager, 

or Michele Easley, Kemmerer Assistant 

Field Manager and RMP team leader, at 

the Kemmerer Field Office, 312 

Highway 189 North, Kemmerer, 

Wyoming 83101; telephone at (307) 

828–4500; or e-mail 

John_Christensen@blm.gov and 

Michelle_Easley@blm.gov, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

approved Kemmerer RMP was revised 

collaboratively with the State of 

Wyoming, county governments, other 

Federal agencies, and tribal 

governments. The Kemmerer RMP 

planning area includes approximately 

1.4 million acres of BLM-administered 

public lands and 1.6 million acres of 

Federal mineral lands under Federal, 

state, and private surface ownership. 

The Approved RMP establishes the 

goals, objectives, and management 

actions to meet desired resource 

conditions; identifies comprehensive 

management direction for all resources 

and uses; identifies lands that are open 

or available for certain uses along with 

associated surface restrictions; and 

identifies lands closed to certain uses. 

The Approved RMP makes broad-scale 

decisions to guide future site-specific 

project implementation for wind energy, 

fluid minerals, and coal resource 

development in the Kemmerer planning 

area. The agency preferred alternative 

(Alternative D, in the Proposed RMP/ 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS), with modifications) is the selected 

alternative for the Approved RMP. 

After the publication of the Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS on August 22, 2008, the 

BLM received 10 protest letters. As a 

result of these protests, the BLM made 

modifications to the proposed plan that 

are reflected in the Approved RMP. The 

BLM eliminated Christy Canyon as a 

forage reserve allotment since a lack of 

available water and a short growing 

season preclude full-season emergency 

relief for livestock operations. The BLM 

also made other minor editorial 

modifications in preparing the 

Approved RMP. These modifications 

provided further clarification of some of 

the decisions. 

In addition, the BLM received protests 

asserting that the public was not 

provided adequate opportunity to 

comment on expanded sage-grouse 

restrictions in the Proposed RMP/Final 

EIS. To resolve the issues raised in these 

protests, the Approved RMP adopts the 

sage-grouse restrictions originally 

presented in the Draft RMP/EIS (and 

reflected in the no action alternative in 

the Proposed RMP/Final EIS). The BLM 

Wyoming State Office, however, is also 

initiating the process to amend the 

Kemmerer, Casper, Pinedale, Rock 

Springs, Newcastle, and Rawlins RMPs. 

These RMP amendments will revise 

sage-grouse and sagebrush management 

direction to incorporate policies set 

forth in BLM Wyoming Instruction 

Memoranda (IM) WY–2010–012 and 

WY–2010–013. The IMs may be 

accessed at the following Web address: 

http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/ 

programs.wildlife.html. 

To ensure appropriate management of 

sage-grouse habitat during the 

amendment process (and associated 

NEPA analysis), the BLM will undertake 

the following actions: 

1. The BLM will apply the direction 

provided in IM WY–2010–012 and IM 

WY–2010–013 to specific projects, as 

appropriate, on a case-by-case basis. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES