45240 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 150 / Monday, August 4, 2008 / Notices 

observed or where observer coverage is 

low. 

Response: The predominant type of 

fishing gear that has been known to 

interact with sea otters are salmon set 

and drift gillnets. Available information 

suggests that fisheries using other types 

of gear, such as trawl, longline, pot, and 

purse seine appear to be less likely to 

have interactions with sea otters due to 

either the areas where such fisheries 

operate, or the specific gear used, or 

both. Gillnet fisheries occur throughout 

the range of sea otters in Alaska; 

however, the nature of their potential 

for interaction depends on several 

factors including sea otter distribution 

and abundance relative to the 

distribution and effort expended in 

these fisheries. We believe that 

application of entanglement rates 

derived from small sample sizes in 

observed fisheries to unobserved 

fisheries in other areas would produce 

questionable results. 

Comment 10: Stock assessment 

reports do not consider other impacts 

from oil and gas development besides 

oil spills. 

Response: We considered disturbance 

from oil and gas exploration, 

development, and production in the 

draft stock assessments; however, we 

did not state this point explicitly in the 

draft stock assessment reports. We have 

revised the final stock assessment 

reports accordingly. 

Comment 11: Fuel oil spills from ship 

traffic should be considered for the 

southcentral and southeast Alaska 

stocks. 

Response: We have included 

additional information from the Alaska 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation spill reporting database 

about ship traffic and other sources that 

have resulted in discharges of crude and 

noncrude oil into the marine 

environment for all 3 stock assessment 

reports. 

Comment 12: The stock assessment 

reports should describe the reasons for 

and implications of the age/sex 

distribution of the subsistence harvest 

on the demography and dynamics of sea 

otter populations. 

Response: We believe the suggested 

additional in-depth analysis of the 

subsistence harvest is beyond the scope 

of these reports as it relates to 

determining the status of the stocks. 

Comment 13: The impact of other 

factors, such as contaminants, should be 

evaluated. 

Response: Available information is 

insufficient to quantitatively estimate 

the impacts of these factors. 

Comment 14: Additional detail on the 

Unusual Mortality Event should be 

included in the stock assessment 

reports. 

Response: Studies of sea otter disease, 

mortality, and survival are ongoing. 

Results are not yet available for 

inclusion in this stock assessment 

report. 

Comment 15: Given the dates of the 

various surveys used to estimate the 

population size of the southwest Alaska 

stock, the current population may be 

lower than the estimated value. 

Response: We acknowledge that 

population estimates for some of the 

regions within the southwest Alaska 

stock are somewhat dated; however, 

they are the best available scientific 

information at this time. Population 

monitoring for this stock is an important 

component of the recovery plan that is 

in development. As this stock is listed 

as threatened under the ESA, it is 

considered strategic under the MMPA 

and subject to annual review, regardless 

of the actual population size. 

Comment 16: Apparent regional 

population trends in the southeast 

Alaska stock should be discussed in 

greater detail. 

Response: The U.S. Geological Survey 

collected survey information for the 

southeast Alaska stock. A summary 

report that addresses this issue is in 

preparation; however, conclusions are 

not available at this time. 

Comment 17: Information gathered 

from the fishing industry cannot be 

relied upon for truthfulness or accuracy 

because of their concern for profits. 

Response: The Service relied on the 

best available scientific information in 

the preparation of these stock 

assessment reports, and readily 

acknowledges the limitations of these 

data. Although some of the information 

is self-reported, we also rely on fisheries 

observer programs when available. 

Comment 18: The agency’s system for 

observing the catch is incorrect and 

untruthful. Cameras on boats and fines 

and jail times are needed. 

Response: Observer programs are 

conducted by the National Marine 

Fisheries Service of the Department of 

Commerce. We have forwarded these 

suggested improvements to them for 

consideration. 

Comment 19: The words ‘‘optimum 

sustainable population’’ are opposed as 

the phrase promotes overutilization of 

the wildlife. 

Response: The term ‘‘Optimal 

Sustainable Population’’ is defined in 

the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 

U.S.C. 1362). 

References Not Cited in the Notice of 

Availability of Draft Revised SARs 

Manly, B.F.J. 2006. Incidental catch and 

interactions of marine mammals and birds 

in the Cook Inlet salmon driftnet and setnet 

fisheries. Western EcoSystems Technology 

Inc. Report. Cheyenne, Wyoming, USA. 

98pp. 

Manly, B.F.J. 2007. Incidental take and 

interactions of marine mammals and birds 

in the Kodiak Island salmon set gillnet 

fishery, 2002 and 2005. Western 

EcoSystems Technology Inc. Report. 

Cheyenne, Wyoming, USA. 221pp. 

Authority: The authority for this action is 

the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 

as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361–1407). 

Dated: July 29, 2008. 

Rowan W. Gould, 

Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–17804 Filed 8–1–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R4–R–2008–N0147; 40136–1265–

0000–S3] 

Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife 

Refuge, Hyde, Tyrrell, and Washington 

Counties, NC 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability: Final 

comprehensive conservation plan and 

finding of no significant impact. 

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service), announce the 

availability of our final comprehensive 

conservation plan (CCP) and finding of 

no significant impact (FONSI) for 

Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge. 

In the final CCP, we describe how we 

will manage this refuge for the next 15 

years. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of the CCP may be 

obtained by writing to: Howard A. 

Phillips, Refuge Manager, Pocosin Lakes 

National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 329, 

Columbia, NC 27925. The CCP may also 

be accessed and downloaded from the 

Service’s Internet site: http:// 

southeast.fws.gov/planning. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Howard A. Phillips; Telephone: 252/ 

796–3004. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

With this notice, we finalize the CCP 

process for Pocosin Lakes National 

Wildlife Refuge. We started this process 

through a notice in the Federal Register 

on November 3, 2000 (65 FR 66256). For 

more about the process, see that notice. 

Congress established the 12,000-acre 

Pungo National Wildlife Refuge in 1963 

by the authorities of the Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act of 1929 and the Fish 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 150 / Monday, August 4, 2008 / Notices 45241 

and Wildlife Act of 1956. In 1990, we 

established Pocosin Lakes National 

Wildlife Refuge, making Pungo Refuge a 

unit of Pocosin Lakes Refuge. The refuge 

now consists of 110,106 acres. We 

named the refuge for the pocosin habitat 

that dominates the landscape and for 

the lakes that occur within the pocosin. 

We announce our decision and the 

availability of the final CCP and FONSI 

for Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife 

Refuge in accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (40 

CFR 1506.6(b)) requirements. We 

completed a thorough analysis of 

impacts on the human environment, 

which we included in the draft 

comprehensive conservation plan and 

environmental assessment (Draft CCP/ 

EA). The CCP will guide us in managing 

and administering Pocosin Lakes Refuge 

for the next 15 years. 

The compatibility determinations for 

hunting; fishing; wildlife observation 

and photography; environmental 

education and interpretation; access for 

public uses; trapping of selected 

furbearers and feral hogs for nuisance 

animal management; refuge resource 

research studies; cooperative farming 

program; commercial photography; 

commercial tours and guiding; wood 

and reed gathering and cutting; and 

meetings of non-service agencies and 

organizations are all available in the 

CCP. 

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. 

Comments 

Approximately 130 copies of the Draft 

CCP/EA were made available for a 30- 

day public review period as announced 

in the Federal Register on July 12, 2007 

(72 FR 38097). Twelve agencies and/or 

individuals submitted comments, either 

in writing or at public forums. Four 

persons spoke at the public forums and 

eight presented written comments, 

representing state agencies, local 

government agencies, non-governmental 

organizations, businesses, and local 

citizens. 

Selected Alternative 

We developed four alternatives for 

management of the refuge and chose 

Alternative 2 as the preferred 

alternative. We selected Alternative 2 

based on the sound professional 

judgment of the staff and after 

considering the comments we received 

on the draft document. The primary 

focus under Alternative 2 will be to 

optimize management of the 

impoundments very intensively by 

controlling water levels and vegetation 

to create optimum habitat for migrating 

waterfowl. Implementing the CCP will 

result in moderate program increases to 

address the refuge’s highest priorities. 

We will manage pine forests and 

marshes with prescribed fire and will 

manage the vegetative composition of 

habitats in selected areas. Waterfowl 

will be surveyed on a routine basis. We 

will develop inventory plans for all 

species and implement them in selected 

habitats. We will develop and 

implement a black bear management 

plan. The visitor center will be 

maintained by volunteers and 

cooperating agency personnel 

supplementing refuge personnel. The 

volunteer program will be expanded by 

recruiting volunteers to contribute 4,000 

hours of service. We will construct two 

pads for recreational vehicles in order to 

attract volunteers. There will be 17.5 

staff members dedicated to refuge 

management and 7.5 staff members 

dedicated to fire management. The six 

priority public uses will be allowed, 

with the refuge staff conducting 

environmental education and 

interpretation programs to meet local 

needs. 

Authority: This notice is published under 

the authority of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement Act of 1997, Public 

Law 105–57. 

Dated: June 10, 2008. 

Cynthia K. Dohner, 

Acting Regional Director. 

[FR Doc. E8–17766 Filed 8–1–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Information Collection Activities, 

Submission to the Office of 

Management and Budget 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of renewal of a currently 

approved information collection. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 

notice announces that the Bureau of 

Indian Affairs has submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget a 

request for approval and renewal of 

information collections, OMB Control 

No. 1076–0017, Financial Assistance 

and Social Service Program application 

form 5–6601. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before September 3, 

2008. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

regarding this proposal to the Desk 

Officer of the Department of the Interior 

by facsimile to (202) 395–6566. You 

may also send comments by e-mail to: 

OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov. 

Copies of comments should refer to 

the proposal by name and/or OMB 

Control Number and should be sent to 

Kevin Sanders, Acting Chief, Office of 

Indian Services, Bureau of Indian 

Affairs, Department of the Interior, 1849 

C Street, NW., MS–4513–MIB, 

Washington, DC 20240. Telephone (202) 

513–7621. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Copies of the collection of information 

form or requests for additional 

information should be directed to Kevin 

Sanders, Office of Indian Services, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of 

the Interior, 1849 C Street, NW., MS–

4513, Washington, DC 20240. 

Telephone (202) 513–7621. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

The Bureau of Indian Affairs needs 

the information collected. Funding of 

these programs is authorized by 25 

U.S.C. 13 to make determinations of 

eligibility for the BIA’s social service 

financial assistance programs: General 

Assistance, Child Welfare Assistance, 

Miscellaneous Assistance, and services 

only (no cash assistance). 

A 60-day notice for public comments 

was published in the Federal Register 

on February 4, 2008 (73 FR 6524). No 

comments were received regarding this 

form. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES